Miller v. Commissioner

4 T.C.M. 749, 1945 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 141
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Miller v. Commissioner. Read the opinion of the Court — 7 T.C. 1245
United States Tax Court·Decided June 27, 1945·No. Docket No. 4236.·Unpublished

Opinion

Ray T. Miller v. Commissioner.
Miller v. Commissioner
Docket No. 4236.
United States Tax Court
1945 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 141; 4 T.C.M. (CCH) 749; T.C.M. (RIA) 45233;
June 27, 1945

*141 Petitioner failed to sustain his burden of proof that the common stock of Continental Shares, Inc. became worthless in the taxable year 1941.

Wayland K. Sullivan, Esq., 1708 Union Commerce Bldg., Cleveland, O., for the petitioner. W. W. Kerr, Esq., for the respondent.

VAN FOSSAN

Memorandum Findings of Fact and Opinion

The respondent determined a deficiency of $2,217.71 in the petitioner's income tax for the year 1941.

The single issue is whether or not certain shares of stock of Continental Shares, Inc., held by the petitioner, became worthless in 1941 and thus deductible from his gross income.

Findings of Fact

Certain facts were stipulated and admitted in the pleadings. Insofar as material to the issue, they are as follows:

The petitioner is an individual residing in Shaker Heights, Ohio. He filed his income tax return for the taxable year with the collector of internal revenue for the eighteenth district of Ohio.

The petitioner made the following purchases, at the dates, and for the considerations indicated:

Apr. 1, 1929 - 50 shares of International Shares$ 4,000.00
Apr. 12, 1929 - 50 shares of International Shares3,350.00
May 1, 1930 - 150 shares of Continental Shares, Inc., received in exchange
for the above 100 shares of International Shares(7,350.00)
May 2, 1929 - 100 shares of Continental Shares, Inc.7,250.00
July 1, 1929 - 100 shares of Continental Shares, Inc.6,500.00
Feb. 19, 1931 - 200 shares of Continental Shares, Inc.1,915.00
Total cost$23,015.00

*142 Continental Shares, Inc., hereinafter called Continental, was a corporation organized in March 1926, under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Maryland, as an investment company of the general management type with a paid-in capital of $6,500,000 representing 50 per cent of subscriptions to a total of 130,000 shares of authorized and issued common shares at a price of $50 per share. Its principal place of business was located in the city of Cleveland, Ohio. Its chief purpose was to acquire substantial holdings, either alone or together with important interests, in prominent companies in such basic industries as steel, rubber and public utilities. The capital and surplus of Continental were increased from time to time by additional payments on the original capital stock, sale of preferred stock and exercise of rights by common stockholders.

On or about October 28, 1930, Continental borrowed $30,000.00 from the Chase National Bank of New York City, and borrowed large amounts from other banks, contemporaneously with the purchase by it of investments owned by Foreign Utilities, Ltd., hereinafter called Utilities, an investment company, for an amount of approximately $45,400,000, *143 $35,000,000 payable in cash and the balance in shares of common stock of Continental. These loans were secured by the pledge of large amounts of securities belonging to Continental which it had acquired prior to, or in connection with, the transaction with Utilities.

In April 1931, George L. Gugle, a stockholder of Continental, filed a suit in the Maryland Circuit Court at Baltimore, Maryland, at which city the annual meeting of Continental was to be held, alleging mismanagement of Continental in connection with the purchase of assets from Utilities, praying an injunction against the ratification of the actions of the officers and board of directors of Continental by the stockholders, an accounting, and an opportunity to examine the books of the company.

Thereafter, in the early part of the year 1931, actions were filed by stockholders of Continental for and on behalf of the company in the Common Pleas Court of Cuyahoga County, Ohio, alleging mismanagement of Continental by the officers and directors thereof and praying for relief on behalf of Continental against certain of its officers and directors as well as other individuals and corporations with respect to various transactions*144 of the company, one of such cases being entitled Charles S. Wachner, et al., plaintiffs, v. Cyrus S. Eaton, et al., defendants, No. 353999 on the docket of said court. After change in the management of Continental on April 25, 1931, the management advised stockholders of Continental that to the best of its judgment, common stock of the corporation had a value of $1.84 per share as of the close of business June 30, 1931.

Continental was unable to meet its obligations on the loan made to it by the Chase National Bank of New York City. The Chase National Bank having announced its intention to sell the securities pledged by Continental to secure payment of said loan, a suit was filed in the early part of 1933 by stockholders of Continental for and on behalf of the company in the State of New York in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York and alleging, substantially, that the $30,000,000 loan from the Chase National Bank to Continental in connection with the sale of assets of Utilities to Continental was made by the Chase National Bank with the knowledge that such sale of assets involved mismanagement of the affairs of Continental by its officers and directors, *145 and praying for an injunction against the sale; that the power of sale and pledge agreements contained in the notes evidencing the indebtedness be declared invalid; and that a receiver be appointed to liquidate the securities held by the Chase National Bank.

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

Miller v. Commissioner, 4 T.C.M. 749, 1945 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 141 (tax 1945).

4 T.C.M. 749 (Miller v. Commissioner) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.