Jack Showell and Dorothy Showell v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

238 F.2d 148
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedNovember 21, 1956
Docket14760
StatusPublished
Cited by22 cases

This text of 238 F.2d 148 (Jack Showell and Dorothy Showell v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Jack Showell and Dorothy Showell v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 238 F.2d 148 (9th Cir. 1956).

Opinions

CHAMBERS, Circuit Judge.

Herein the Tax Court has made the following preliminary statement and findings:

“The respondent determined deficiencies in the income tax of the petitioners for 1949 as follows:
“The only question for determination is the correctness of the respondent’s action in determining that each of the petitioners realized income of $11,281.83 from wagering operations during 1949 which was not reported in their respective income tax returns for said year.
Findings of Fact
“The petitioners are husband and wife and filed their separate income tax returns for 1949, prepared on the community basis, with the collector for the district of Arizona.
“In their returns for 1949, the petitioners reported income from interest, from a partnership, and rental income from a building. No income was reported from, or loss deducted with respect to, any wagering operations.
“During 1949, Jack Showell, sometimes hereinafter referred to as the petitioner, received money from booking bets on baseball, football, and basketball games. No receipts or tickets were given for money placed on bets. Approximately 90 per cent of the bets were placed over the telephone and were made by persons known to petitioner. Where a bettor was known to petitioner, and the petitioner felt that he would be able to collect from him, the bet was accepted without requiring the bettor first to pay the amount of his bet. All other bettors were required to pay petitioner the amount of their bets before their bets were accepted. The petitioner received cash from some bettors for the bets placed with him. Other bettors gave him checks for the amount of their bets.
“The petitioner operated as follows: Bets were accepted on either of two teams participating in a baseball, basketball, or football game at odds of 6 against 5. Thus, a bettor was required to bet $6 before he could win $5. Where one person bet $6 on one team and another person bet $6 on the opposing team, the petitioner paid the bettor on the winning team $11 and retained $1, or 854 per cent of the total amount bet, as commission. Therefore, as long as there was an equal amount of money bet on each of two opposing teams in a given game, the petitioner could not lose, but instead realized a commission of 81/3 per cent of the total amount bet on the two teams. In an effort to keep the amount of money bet on each team as nearly equal as possible ‘point spreads’ were utilized. Thus, if a Michigan team was a 7-point favorite over a Minnesota team, the bettor on the Michigan team could not win unless that team won by more than 7 points. The bettor on the Minnesota team won if the Michigan team won by less than 7 points. If the score was 14 to 7, both bets were off and each bettor received back his money. The element of risk to the petitioner arose only when more money was bet on one team than on the other. In that event, either petitioner’s winnings would be greater or his losses would be larger.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Allnutt v. Comm'r
2004 T.C. Memo. 239 (U.S. Tax Court, 2004)
Szkircsak v. Commissioner
1980 T.C. Memo. 129 (U.S. Tax Court, 1980)
Golden Nugget, Inc. v. Commissioner
1969 T.C. Memo. 149 (U.S. Tax Court, 1969)
Barnes Theatre Ticket Service, Inc. v. Commissioner
1967 T.C. Memo. 250 (U.S. Tax Court, 1967)
Greenfeld v. Commissioner
1966 T.C. Memo. 83 (U.S. Tax Court, 1966)
Sclafani v. Comm'r
1963 T.C. Memo. 298 (U.S. Tax Court, 1963)
Reyer v. Commissioner
1962 T.C. Memo. 240 (U.S. Tax Court, 1962)
Stein v. Commissioner
1962 T.C. Memo. 19 (U.S. Tax Court, 1962)
Jack Showell v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
286 F.2d 245 (Ninth Circuit, 1961)
Lesly Cohen v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
266 F.2d 5 (Ninth Circuit, 1959)
Masters v. Commissioner
243 F.2d 335 (Third Circuit, 1957)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
238 F.2d 148, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jack-showell-and-dorothy-showell-v-commissioner-of-internal-revenue-ca9-1956.