Maxwell v. Frank

182 F. Supp. 823, 5 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 817, 1960 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4674
CourtDistrict Court, W.D. Washington
DecidedFebruary 15, 1960
DocketNo. 2361
StatusPublished

This text of 182 F. Supp. 823 (Maxwell v. Frank) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, W.D. Washington primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Maxwell v. Frank, 182 F. Supp. 823, 5 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 817, 1960 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4674 (W.D. Wash. 1960).

Opinion

BOLDT, District Judge.

The above-entitled cause having come on regularly for trial before the Honorable George H. Boldt, United States District Judge presiding, sitting without a jury, on December 16, 17 and 18, 1959, the plaintiffs represented by their attorneys, Carlson, Newlands, Reha & Sinnitt by Reuben C. Carlson and John J. Reha, Jr., and Watkins, Lund & Peck by Richard F. Alden, and the defendant represented by his attorneys, Charles P. Moriarty, U. S. Atty., Seattle, Wash., Charles Billinghurst, Asst. U. S. Atty., and Thomas Frazier, attorney, Department of Justice, the Court having considered the Pre-Trial Order, written stipulations of the parties, oral testimony, documentary evidence, oral argument and memoranda and trial briefs of counsel and the Court being fully advised in the premises, makes its Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law as follows:

Findings of Fact

(1) Plaintiff, H. D. Maxwell is the husband of plaintiff, Josephine E. Maxwell. Plaintiff Oswald Thomas is the husband of plaintiff Harriet S. Thomas. During the years 1952 and 1953 and for many years prior thereto plaintiffs H. D. Maxwell and Oswald Thomas were general partners in Maxwell Petroleum Company, a general partnership. All of the plaintiffs at all times mentioned herein were residents of the Western District of the State of Washington.

(2) Defendant resides in the Western District of the State of Washington and is now and has been since October 31, 1952 the District Director of Internal [824]*824Revenue for the State of Washington. Plaintiffs’ joint income tax returns for the calendar years 1952 and 1953 were duly filed with and the taxes shown thereon to be due were paid to defendant.

(3) This action is filed pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. § 1340 for the recovery of income taxes and interest thereon collected from plaintiffs by defendant for the calendar year 1953, together with interest thereon from the respective dates of payment. The parties in their Pre-Trial Order have admitted the jurisdiction of this Court.

(4) Prior to August 8, 1952 said partnership, Maxwell Petroleum Company, engaged in the business of a wholesale distributor of petroleum products and automobile accessories in certain counties in the State of Washington. Plaintiff Maxwell’s interest in this partnership during the years 1952 and 1953 was 75% and plaintiff Thomas’ interest was 25%. Said partnership reported partnership income on an accrual basis and was on a fiscal year ending May 31. Plaintiffs reported their income on a cash basis and were on a calendar year.

(5) On examination of said partnership’s income tax return for the fiscal year ending May 31, 1953 the Commissioner of Internal Revenue reclassified certain of said proceeds of a sale as ordinary income and short-term capital gain. Deficiencies in federal income tax were assessed against plaintiffs in accordance with such determinations.

(6) As a result of these determinations, plaintiffs were assessed and on the dates shown paid defendant the following amounts of income tax and interest:

Assessed

Tax Interest Total

Plaintiffs Maxwell

October 3, 1957 $248,874.07 $52,999.95 $301,874.02

Plaintiffs Thomas

October 23, 1957 63,726.40 13,784.98 77,511.38

No part of said taxes or interest has been repaid or credited to plaintiffs or any of them.

(7) On or about May 20, 1958, within the time prescribed by law, plaintiffs duly filed with defendant their respective claims for refund for the calendar year 1953 requesting refund of the total amount of taxes and interest as set forth in paragraph 6 above, plus interest thereon as provided by law. On or about May 26, 1958, within the time prescribed by law, plaintiffs Thomas duly filed with defendant an amended claim for refund for the calendar year 1953 to correct a typographical error in said claim.

(8) Each of said claims for refund set forth the grounds upon which it was based and the grounds upon which this action is based. No claim or any part thereof has been assigned by any of the plaintiffs and plaintiffs are now the respective owners of said claims in their entirety.

(9) By letters dated September 23, 1958 and sent to plaintiffs Maxwell and Thomas, respectively, by registered mail said Commissioner of Internal Revenue rejected said claims for refund in their entirety.

(10) Plaintiff Maxwell started in the business of a wholesale distributor of petroleum products and automobile accessories on or about January 1, 1936 in the State of Washington. This business was conducted under the name of Maxwell Petroleum Company and enjoyed an increasing volume of sales throughout Tacoma, Seattle and other cities of western Washington. In addition, Maxwell Petroleum Company distributed its products in eastern Washington, principally [825]*825in the Yakima and Wenatchee areas. On January 1, 1944, at the invitation of General Petroleum Corporation, Maxwell Petroleum Company entered into and signed exclusive wholesale distribution contracts with General Petroleum Corporation to become its wholesale distributor for a period of five years in Pierce County and Thurston County, Washington (hereinafter referred to as the Tacoma and Olympia areas, respectively). As a part of said contracts, Maxwell Petroleum Company transferred at its cost certain valuable stations and accounts located outside of the Tacoma and Olympia areas to General Petroleum Corporation. Maxwell Petroleum Company in turn received valuable accounts and leases on certain stations in the Tacoma and Olympia areas from General Petroleum Corporation. By the terms of said wholesale distributorship contracts these General Petroleum stations and accounts were to be returned to General Petroleum Corporation upon any termination of the wholesale distributorship contracts and are hereinafter referred to as General Petroleum stations and accounts. On or about June 1, 1946, at General Petroleum Corporation’s invitation, said distributorship contracts were modified and extended for a period of ten years. Said contracts were to expire by their terms on June 1, 1956. As of the effective date of the sale, said contracts, as extended, each had three years and nine months to run until said expiration date.

(11) Said wholesale distributorship contracts throughout their respective terms as extended, and particularly in 1952, were neither burdensome nor onerous to General Petroleum Corporation. The allowances granted Maxwell Petroleum Company under said wholesale distributorship contracts were less than the average distributorship allowances given by suppliers such as General Petroleum Corporation in 1952 to distributors such as Maxwell Petroleum Company. Maxwell Petroleum Company also had to bear certain expenses such as advertising normally paid by suppliers such as General Petroleum Corporation. There were no disputes or disagreements between Maxwell Petroleum Company and General Petroleum Corporation at any time and their relationship was at all times harmonious. Said wholesale distributorship contracts had no value in 1952.

(12) In 1950 a heart attack was suffered by plaintiff Maxwell and both plaintiff Maxwell and plaintiff Thomas decided to sell their entire business and retire. In 1951, plaintiffs went to General Petroleum Corporation and offered to sell their partnership business to General Petroleum Corporation.

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
182 F. Supp. 823, 5 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 817, 1960 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4674, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/maxwell-v-frank-wawd-1960.