Phillips v. United States

233 F. Supp. 59, 21 Oil & Gas Rep. 486, 14 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 5460, 1964 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9757
CourtDistrict Court, E.D. Texas
DecidedJuly 11, 1964
DocketCiv. A. 4179
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 233 F. Supp. 59 (Phillips v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Phillips v. United States, 233 F. Supp. 59, 21 Oil & Gas Rep. 486, 14 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 5460, 1964 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9757 (E.D. Tex. 1964).

Opinion

SHEEHY, Chief Judge.

This is an income tax refund case. The Plaintiffs are husband and wife and reside in Gladewater, Texas. The years involved are 1959, 1960 and 1961. The Plaintiff, Loyce Phillips, is and during the tax years involved was an independent oil operator with working interests in some 40 to 50 oil and gas wells, about ten of which were located in the Manuel Rionda Survey, Freestone County, near Fairfield, Texas, in the so-called Nan-Su-Gail Field. Most of the pertinent facts were stipulated by the parties as reflected by the Stipulation of Facts and exhibits thereto attached filed herein on May 8, 1964, and Supplemental Stipulation No. 1 filed on May 21, 1964. Said Stipulations of Facts and the exhibits thereto attached and said Supplemental Stipulation No. 1 are hereby adopted and made a part hereof.

Plaintiffs timely filed their income tax returns for the calendar years involved with the District Director of Internal Revenue in Dallas, Texas, and duly paid the taxes respectively shown thereon to' be due. The alleged payments of income taxes sought to be recovered herein are the amount of deficiencies assessed against and collected, with interest thereon, from the Plaintiffs, which deficiencies resulted from (1) the action of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, hereinafter referred to as Commissioner, in the setting up of salvage value for certain depreciable assets used in the trade or business of Plaintiffs; (2) the disallowance by the Commissioner of a deduction on Plaintiffs’ 1960 income tax return in the amount of $500.00 paid by Loyce Phillips as rental on easing used in an oil well in which Loyce Phillips was part owner and the capitalization of the entire amount of $1,000.00 paid by all of the owners of the full interest for the rental of said casing; and (3) the disallowance by the Commissioner of the deduction by Plaintiffs on their income tax return filed for the year 1960 of certain intangible drilling and development cost in the amount of $9,000.00. The Defendant concedes that the capitalization of the full amount of $1,000.00, the total cost of the rental of casing used in a certain oil well, was erroneous and the parties agreed that $500.00, the portion of said $1,000.-00 attributable to Plaintiffs’ interest in said well, is properly to be capitalized by Plaintiffs and amortized over the ten-year estimated productive life of the lease on which the well was located. The parties, by Supplemental Stipulation No. 1, above referred to, have agreed as to-the salvage value to be attributable to-the assets of Plaintiffs that were salvageable and the rate of depreciation for the depreciable assets of Plaintiffs. Therefore, the only question remaining for decision by the Court is the one relating to the action of the Commissioner in disallowing for the calendar year 1960 a certain alleged intangible drilling and development cost to Loyce Phillips in the amount of $9,000.00. The remainder of *61 this opinion will he directed to that question.

Upon his graduation from the University of Texas in 1949 with a B.S. degree in Geology, Plaintiffs’ son, Jack L. Phillips, became and since that time has been continuously associated with his father in charge of drilling and production of oil and gas. In all transactions hereinafter referred to Jack L. Phillips acted both for himself and as agent for his father, Loyce Phillips.

Early in September 1960 Humble Oil and Refining Company, hereinafter referred to as Humble, acting by and through its'agent and employee, Grover Hubley, hereinafter referred to as Hub-ley, contacted Jack L. Phillips with regard to Loyce Phillips taking a farmout of certain oil and gas leases covering lands located in the Manuel Rionda Survey in Freestone County, Texas, and drilling a well into the Woodbine formation exploring for oil and gas. This well for convenience will hereinafter be referred to as the Pace Well. Hubley, on behalf of Humble, offered to pay $12,000.00 for the performance of the terms and conditions of the offered farmout. Jack L. Phillips advised Hubley that the cost of drilling a well to the depth of the Woodbine formation in accordance with the specifications required by Humble would be approximately $14,000.00 to $14,500.00. Hubley and Jack L. Phillips did not reach an agreement as to the farmout and the said Jack L. Phillips left the office of Hubley. A few days subsequent thereto but prior to September 22, 1960, Hubley, believing that Jack L. Phillips was not interested in the farm-out on the terms offered, contacted Harry S. Phillips, who is not related to either of the Plaintiffs or Jack L. Phillips, and offered said farmout to the said Harry S. Phillips on the same terms it had been offered to Jack L. Phillips. The farmout was accepted by Harry S. Phillips on the terms it was offered, namely, that Phillips would drill the Pace Well into the Woodbine formation, and for his so doing Humble would pay him $12,000.-00, and when the well reached the casing point in the Woodbine formation, Humble had the option to take over the operation of said well, in which event Humble would pay Harry S. Phillips the sum of $12,000.00, would complete said well at its cost and would assign to the said Harry S. Phillips an overriding royalty of l/16th of 8/8ths of all oil and gas produced from the acreage involved in the farmout. Harry S. Phillips subcontracted the actual drilling of the well to Gibson Drilling Company. The well was drilled into the Woodbine formation as of September 30, 1960, and was not commercially productive in that formation. In drilling said well to the Woodbine formation the drill hole passed thru the Sub-Clarksville formation, from which formation Loyce and Jack L. Phillips had brought in producing wells in the area of the Pace Well which they were then producing. Humble’s principal interest was in the Woodbine production and it. had very little, if any, interest in the Sub-Clarksville production in the area.

Shortly after his conversation with Hubley relative to the farmout, above referred to, and prior to September 20, 1960, Jack L. Phillips went to Freestone County to find the approximate location where the Pace Well was to be drilled. As he was leaving the location, he met Harry S. Phillips who was trying also to-find the location and who in the ensuing conversation advised Jack L. Phillips that he, Harry S. Phillips, had taken the farm-out for the drilling of the Pace Well which Hubley had discussed with Jack L. Phillips, Immediately following that, conversation with Harry S. Phillips, Jack L. Phillips went to Hubley’s office and advised Hubley that it was his understanding that the proposed farmout was still being negotiated between Hubley and himself. Hubley advised Jack L. Phillips, that it was his understanding that Jack L. Phillips had turned down Hubley’s offer of the farmout and that such farm-out had been offered to and accepted by Harry S. Phillips on the same terms as offered to Jack L. Phillips. During the course of that conversation Hubley further advised Jack L. Phillips to the effect *62 that if the Pace Well were dry in the Woodbine formation, that Humble would probably let Jack L. Phillips have the well.

On or about September 29, 1960, when it appeared to Humble, Harry S. Phillips and Jack L. Phillips that the Pace Well would not be a producer in the Woodbine formation, Jack L. Phillips and Humble had further discussions relative to Jack L. Phillips taking over the Pace Well under a farmout agreement and completing same as a producing well in the Sub-Clarksville formation.

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

Related

Haass v. Commissioner
55 T.C. 43 (U.S. Tax Court, 1970)
Phillips v. United States
353 F.2d 739 (Fifth Circuit, 1965)
Loyce Phillips and Inez Phillips v. United States
353 F.2d 739 (Fifth Circuit, 1965)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
233 F. Supp. 59, 21 Oil & Gas Rep. 486, 14 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 5460, 1964 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9757, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/phillips-v-united-states-txed-1964.