Home/Ninth Circuit/John W. Rogers and Creta B. Rogers v. United States

John W. Rogers and Creta B. Rogers v. United States

290 F.2d 501, 7 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 1318, 1961 U.S. App. LEXIS 4924
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided April 3, 1961·No. 16851_1·Published·Cited by 27 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed in that its findings on the facts are not clearly erroneous.

The taxpayers probably have been maneuvered by their purchaser into a big tax disadvantage. But, when in their second option, they agreed in writing after negotiation to the assignment of some |60,900 as consideration for a covenant not to compete, the trial court could refuse to go behind the agreement and uphold the commissioner in treating the sum as ordinary income. We find Hamlin’s Trust v. Commissioner, 10 Cir., 209 F.2d 761, pertinent and a case that should be followed here.

Had there been any equivocation or any confusion as to what was done, then taxpayers would have had a far different case. Third parties may question the resolutions of parties to a contract, but in the absence of fraud it is not ordinarily open to the bargainers to do so. Cf. Gray v. Powell, 314 U.S. 402, 414, 62 S.Ct. 326, 86 L.Ed. 301.

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

John W. Rogers and Creta B. Rogers v. United States, 290 F.2d 501, 7 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 1318, 1961 U.S. App. LEXIS 4924 (9th Cir. 1961).

290 F.2d 501 (John W. Rogers and Creta B. Rogers v. United States) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Ehlert v. Commissioner
1985 T.C. Memo. 479 (U.S. Tax Court, 1985)
Harrah v. Commissioner
70 T.C. 735 (U.S. Tax Court, 1978)
Carl E. Mathena and Helen B. Mathena, and v. United States
446 F.2d 560 (Ninth Circuit, 1971)
Harlan E. Baxter and Imogene Baxter v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Lovell J. Proby and Eva M. Proby v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
433 F.2d 757 (Ninth Circuit, 1970)
Estate of Rogers v. Commissioner
1970 T.C. Memo. 192 (U.S. Tax Court, 1970)
Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Carl L. Danielson and Pauline S. Danielson, Commissioner Ofinternal Revenue v. Helen P. Sherman, Commissioner Ofinternal Revenue v. Estate of Jacob F. Schaffner, Deceased, Elizabeth Schaffner and Erwin Marsch, Executors, and Elizabeth Schaffner, Commissionerof Internal Revenue v. Hugh E. McLennan and Katherine McLennan
378 F.2d 771 (Third Circuit, 1967)
Commissioner v. Danielson
378 F.2d 771 (Third Circuit, 1967)
The Coca-Cola Company, a Corporation v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
369 F.2d 913 (Eighth Circuit, 1966)
Deutschmann v. Commissioner
1966 T.C. Memo. 229 (U.S. Tax Court, 1966)
Charles W. Balthrope and Mary v. Balthrope v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
356 F.2d 28 (Fifth Circuit, 1966)
Levinson v. Commissioner
45 T.C. 380 (U.S. Tax Court, 1966)
Danielson v. Commissioner
44 T.C. 549 (U.S. Tax Court, 1965)
Lichtman v. Commissioner
1964 T.C. Memo. 287 (U.S. Tax Court, 1964)
Emmette L. Barran and Martha Barran v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
334 F.2d 58 (Fifth Circuit, 1964)
Balthrope v. Commissioner
1964 T.C. Memo. 31 (U.S. Tax Court, 1964)
Barran v. Commissioner
39 T.C. 515 (U.S. Tax Court, 1962)
Annabelle Candy Co. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
314 F.2d 1 (Ninth Circuit, 1962)
Yandell v. United States
208 F. Supp. 306 (D. Oregon, 1962)
Pacific Rock & Gravel Co., a Corporation v. United States
297 F.2d 122 (Ninth Circuit, 1961)
Ray H. Schulz and Doris L. Schulz v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, John W. Schulz and Lucille Schulz v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Melvin F. Klagues and Pauline Klagues v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Stanley C. Landen and Victoria M. Landen
294 F.2d 52 (Ninth Circuit, 1961)