Roth v. Commissioner

Board of Tax Appeals

Roth v. Commissioner

7 B.T.A. 628, 1927 BTA LEXIS 3129

CourtUnited States Board of Tax Appeals

DecidedJuly 13, 1927

DocketDocket No. 21365.

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 7 B.T.A. 628 (Roth v. Commissioner) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Board of Tax Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Roth v. Commissioner, 7 B.T.A. 628, 1927 BTA LEXIS 3129 (bta 1927).

Pincite

Opinion

[630]*630OPINION.

Smith:

The only point in issue in this proceeding is whether an ordinary partnership existed between the petitioner and his father from January 1, 1921, to May 11,1923, inclusive. In his petition the petitioner alleges the existence of a partnership between himself and his father prior to May 12, 1923, based upon an oral contract. There is not sufficient evidence in the record, however, of the entering into any such contract on the part of father and son. The father’s credit was ruined by reason of the bankruptcy proceedings. The father had judgments outstanding against him and it was apparently the intention of both parties that the assets of the business should be beyond the reach of the father’s creditors. We are of the opinion that the evidence does not warrant any finding of fact that a partnership existed between the father and son prior to May 12, 1923.

Reviewed by the Board.

Judgment will be entered on 15 days’ notice, under Bule 50.

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

[630]*630OPINION.

Smith:

The only point in issue in this proceeding is whether an ordinary partnership existed between the petitioner and his father from January 1, 1921, to May 11,1923, inclusive. In his petition the petitioner alleges the existence of a partnership between himself and his father prior to May 12, 1923, based upon an oral contract. There is not sufficient evidence in the record, however, of the entering into any such contract on the part of father and son. The father’s credit was ruined by reason of the bankruptcy proceedings. The father had judgments outstanding against him and it was apparently the intention of both parties that the assets of the business should be beyond the reach of the father’s creditors. We are of the opinion that the evidence does not warrant any finding of fact that a partnership existed between the father and son prior to May 12, 1923.

Reviewed by the Board.

Judgment will be entered on 15 days’ notice, under Bule 50.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

7 B.T.A. 628, 1927 BTA LEXIS 3129, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/roth-v-commissioner-bta-1927.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack