Blaschka v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims
393 F.2d 983 (1968)
- Written by Heather Ryfa, JD
Facts
Clara Blaschka (plaintiff) owned 92.3 percent of C. & C. Blaschka, Inc. (C&C); her husband owned the remaining 7.7 percent. The Blaschkas were executive officers and on the board of directors. C&C was engaged in the wholesale glove business in the United States and had a wholly owned Canadian subsidiary, Max Mayer & Company, Ltd. (Max Mayer), which sold gloves in Canada. C&C received 3 percent of Max Mayer’s net sales under a management agreement. C&C sold its United States glove business and the name Max Mayer to unrelated third parties. The C&C board of directors conducted several conferences to determine what to do with the funds received. C&C decided to purchase all shares of Clairette Manufacturing Company, Inc. (Clairette), a real estate company, from Clara; the meeting minutes did not mention a partial liquidation. Clara claimed the $115,000 received from C&C as long-term capital gain on the sale of stock. The commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service (defendant) assessed a deficiency, claiming that this amount was a dividend taxable as ordinary income. Clara filed a Notice of Protest, in which she stated that C&C decided to use accumulated earnings to pursue a different business rather than liquidate. After the commissioner denied her protest, Clara paid the tax and then sued for refund in the United States Court of Federal Claims.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Per curiam)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 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.