From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Smith

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
Mar 24, 1949
173 F.2d 470 (5th Cir. 1949)

Opinion

No. 12489.

March 24, 1949.

Petition for Review of Decision of the Tax Court of the United States.

Petition by Commissioner of Internal Revenue for review of a decision of the tax court of the United States 10 T.C. 398, redetermining income tax deficiencies assessed against H.R. Smith.

Decision affirmed.

Theron Lamar Caudle, Asst. Atty. Gen., George A. Stinson, and Ellis N. Slack, Sp. Assts. to Atty. Gen., and Charles Oliphant, Gen. Counsel Bureau of Internal Revenue, and Charles E. Lowery, Sp. Atty. Bureau of Internal Revenue, both of Washington, D.C., and Hilbert P. Zarky and Helen Goodner, Sp. Assts. to Atty. Gen., for petitioner.

Robert Ash and Carl F. Bauersfeld, both of Washington, D.C., for respondent.

Before HUTCHESON, HOLMES, and LEE, Circuit Judges.


The taxpayer owned a 65% interest in the partnership business of Hyman Supply Company, a retailer of oil-field supplies in Alice, Texas. On December 31, 1942, he sold his undivided interest in the business to one of the remaining partners and two new persons. The sole question for decision is: Was this sale of the taxpayer's undivided interest the sale of a capital asset?

It is well settled in Texas that a partner has no separate or exclusive right to any part or portion of the partnership assets, but has a common interest in all of the assets. The ownership of one partner in the property of the firm is not only subject to the rights of creditors, but is subject to the ownership of all the other partners. Warren v. Wallis, Landes Co., 38 Tex. 225. A partner's only interest in the property of the firm is in a proper proportion of the surplus of the whole after payment of debts, including the amounts due the other partners. Sherk v. First National Bank of Hereford, Tex.Com.App., 206 S.W. 507.

The taxpayer here sold an intangible asset or chose in action, not his interest in the specific assets of the firm; and, since it had been held by him for more than six months, only 50 per centum of the gain was taxable under Section 117 of the Internal Revenue Code, 26 U.S.C.A. § 117; Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Shapiro, 6 Cir., 125 F.2d 532, 144 A.L.R. 349; Thornley v. Commissioner, 3 Cir., 147 F.2d 416; United States v. Landreth, 5 Cir., 164 F.2d 340; Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Lehman, 2 Cir., 165 F.2d 383, certiorari denied, 334 U.S. 819, 68 S.Ct. 1085. Distinguishable: Williams v. McGowan, 2 Cir., 152 F.2d 570, 162 A.L.R. 1036. Contra: City Bank Farmers Trust Co. v. United States, 47 F. Supp. 98, 97 Ct. Cl. 296 .

The judgment appealed from is affirmed.


Summaries of

Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Smith

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
Mar 24, 1949
173 F.2d 470 (5th Cir. 1949)
Case details for

Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Smith

Case Details

Full title:COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE v. SMITH

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit

Date published: Mar 24, 1949

Citations

173 F.2d 470 (5th Cir. 1949)

Citing Cases

Swiren v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

" Among the cases cited by the general counsel are Kessler, Jr. v. United States, 3 Cir., 124 F.2d 152;…

United States v. Shapiro

The difficulty with the Government's position, which is not devoid of logic, is that it is contrary to the…