Sperry and Hutchinson Co. v. Department of Revenue
Oregon Supreme Court
527 P.2d 729, 270 Or. 329 (1974)
- Written by Heather Whittemore, JD
Facts
The Sperry & Hutchinson Company (Sperry) (plaintiff) was incorporated in New Jersey and domiciled in New York. Sperry’s primary business was selling promotional trading stamps to businesses. Sperry invested its revenue in three categories of investment: short-term securities holding money used in the trading-stamp business, short-term securities held for investment purposes, and long-term securities held for investment purposes. Sperry believed that all the interest it received on its investments was allocable to its domicile, New York, and not apportionable to the other states in which it did business. The Oregon Department of Revenue (the department) (defendant) argued that the interest was apportionable and assessed a tax deficiency against Sperry. The Oregon Tax Court held that the interest from the long-term and short-term securities held for investment purposes was not apportionable, but that the interest from the short-term securities related to the trading-stamp business was apportionable. The department appealed the tax court’s first holding, and Sperry cross-appealed the tax court’s second holding.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (O’Connell, C.J.)
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.
