Mooney v. Commissioner

1958 T.C. Memo. 116, 17 T.C.M. 631, 1958 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 112
CourtUnited States Tax Court
DecidedJune 20, 1958
DocketDocket No. 60544.
StatusUnpublished

This text of 1958 T.C. Memo. 116 (Mooney v. Commissioner) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Tax Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Mooney v. Commissioner, 1958 T.C. Memo. 116, 17 T.C.M. 631, 1958 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 112 (tax 1958).

Opinion

Milton A. and Beatrice Mooney v. Commissioner.
Mooney v. Commissioner
Docket No. 60544.
United States Tax Court
T.C. Memo 1958-116; 1958 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 112; 17 T.C.M. (CCH) 631; T.C.M. (RIA) 58116;
June 20, 1958

*112 Upon the facts, held, that loans which became worthless in the taxable year represented nonbusiness bad debts deductible only under section 23(k)(4), 1939 Code.

Theodore M. Garver, Esq., for the petitioners. L. Robert Leisner, Esq., for the respondent.

HARRON

Memorandum Findings of Fact and Opinion

HARRON, Judge: The Commissioner determined a deficiency*113 in income tax for the taxable year 1953 in the amount of $7,355.30 and additions under sections 294(d)(1)(A) and 294(d)(2), 1939 Code, in the total amount of $1,625.23. The principal question is whether a debt in the amount of $14,015 was a nonbusiness bad debt for which deduction is limited by section 23(k)(4), as respondent determined, or was a business bad debt which is deductible in its entirety under section 23(k)(1), as claimed by petitioner.

Findings of Fact

Petitioners, who reside in Shaker Heights, near Cleveland, Ohio, filed a joint return for 1953 with the collector of internal revenue for the eighteenth district of Ohio. Since the issues relate to Milton A. Mooney, he is referred to hereinafter as the petitioner.

Petitioner has had long experience in and is well acquainted with the business of obtaining films from distributors for exhibition by independent motion picture theaters, and he knows a great deal about the business of operating motion picture theaters, and about related aspects of that business. He obtained his original experience as an employee of Warner Brothers Distribution Company. In the 1930's, for an undisclosed period, he was the manager of the Cleveland*114 office of Warner Brothers Distribution Company, which distributed films to theaters in Cleveland.

During 1953, petitioner was employed by a corporation which he organized, Cooperative Theaters of Ohio, and his chief income was his salary from that corporation. However, petitioner received income from other sources in 1953, and his activities relating to other enterprises began prior to 1953. The evidence before us shows in some detail petitioner's activities prior to 1953. For convenience, there are set forth below, first, the facts relating to operations from which petitioner derived income in 1953, followed by facts pertaining to his interests before 1953:

Sources of Income in 1953

The following schedule shows items of income in 1953, exclusive of dividends and interest, which were reported in petitioner's return:

1. Coop. Theatres of Ohio, salary$18,750
2. Highway Theatres, Inc., salary4,800
3. Highway Concessions, profit3,300
4. Sky-High Drive In Theatre, rent1,200
5. Fulton Amusement Co., salary2,500
6. Academy Film Service, Inc., salary2,600
7. WAKR-TV - booking commission1,500
8. WHIZ-TV - booking commission1,910
9. WTRF-TV - booking commission900
10. Coop. Theatres of Buffalo, profit3,712
*115 The following facts show the history and the nature of the business of the corporations which paid petitioner a salary, and the activities of petitioner in earning income as a sole proprietor:

1. Cooperative Theatres of Ohio, Inc. Petitioner is a director and a stockholder of Cooperative Theatres of Ohio, and in 1953 he was its president, secretary, and treasurer. He organized this corporation in 1938, when he acquired all of its stock for about $1,250. He owned all of the stock continuously thereafter during each year, including 1953. A few years ago he transferred about 30 per cent of the stock to his son. This corporation is still engaged in business.

Cooperatives Theatres of Ohio is engaged in the business of buying and booking motion picture films for clients, which are motion picture theaters that show the films. This business is known generally as the motion picture booking business. Petitioner has been an employee, the manager of the business, of Cooperative Theatres of Ohio at all times, and he has always received a salary for his services. Cooperative Theatres of Ohio paid him a salary in 1953 in the amount of $18,750, and dividends in the amount of $7,500. From 1938*116 through 1953, a period of about 15 years, petitioner's gross receipts from this corporation in salary and dividends have amounted to about $335,000. Petitioner is and always has been the dominating figure in the operation of the business of Cooperative Theatres of Ohio.

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

Related

Dalton v. Bowers
287 U.S. 404 (Supreme Court, 1932)
Burnet v. Clark
287 U.S. 410 (Supreme Court, 1932)
Campbell v. Commissioner
11 T.C. 510 (U.S. Tax Court, 1948)
Smith v. Commissioner
17 T.C. 135 (U.S. Tax Court, 1951)
Boissevain v. Commissioner
17 T.C. 325 (U.S. Tax Court, 1951)
Fuller v. Commissioner
21 T.C. 407 (U.S. Tax Court, 1953)
Skarda v. Commissioner
27 T.C. 137 (U.S. Tax Court, 1956)
Ferguson v. Commissioner
28 T.C. 432 (U.S. Tax Court, 1957)
Van Dyke v. Commissioner
23 B.T.A. 946 (Board of Tax Appeals, 1931)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1958 T.C. Memo. 116, 17 T.C.M. 631, 1958 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 112, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mooney-v-commissioner-tax-1958.