Annabelle Candy Co. v. Commissioner
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
314 F.2d 1 (1962)
- Written by Rich Walter, JD
Facts
Sam Altshuler and Fred Sommers were the sole shareholders of the successful Annabelle Candy Company (Annabelle) (plaintiff). The two shareholders signed an agreement for Altshuler’s purchase of Sommers’s shares for $115,000. The agreement included a covenant barring Sommers from competing with Altshuler for five years. Altshuler and Sommers preliminarily set the $115,000 purchase price before they began discussions over the covenant. The agreement did not allocate any portion of the $115,000 price to the covenant, which was of great value to Altshuler. Altshuler’s bookkeeper unsuccessfully advised Altshuler to include severable consideration for the covenant in the agreement for tax purposes. On the federal tax return for Annabelle, of which he was now the sole owner, Altshuler allocated $80,554.67 of the $115,000 purchase price to the covenant. Altshuler began amortizing this allocation over the covenant’s five-year term. However, the commissioner of internal revenue (commissioner) (defendant) determined that Annabelle was not entitled to the amortization deductions. Annabelle petitioned the tax court for a redetermination, and the tax court ruled in the commissioner’s favor. Annabelle appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Barnes, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 802,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
