Thomas v. Patterson, Civ. A. No. 9098.
| Decision Date | 02 November 1959 |
| Docket Number | Civ. A. No. 9098. |
| Citation | 189 F. Supp. 230 |
| Parties | J. C. THOMAS and Martha Thomas, Plaintiffs, v. George D. PATTERSON, District Director of Internal Revenue, Defendant. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Northern District of Alabama |
John W. Gillon and Ralph B. Tate, of Spain, Gillon & Young, and Ira L. Burleson, Birmingham, Ala., for plaintiffs.
W. L. Longshore, U. S. Atty., and M. L. Tanner, Asst. U. S. Atty., Birmingham, Ala., and Arthur C. Flinders, Atty., Dept. of Justice, Washington, D. C., for defendant.
This cause coming on to be heard was tried by the Court without a Jury. After a full and fair consideration of the evidence adduced by the parties and the written trial briefs of counsel, the Court now proceeds to make and enter the following findings of fact, conclusions of law and judgment:
Findings of Fact
1. The Plaintiffs are husband and wife. On or about February 14, 1957,
they filed their joint Federal Income Tax Return for the calendar year 1956 and paid the tax thereon. After audit, the District Director of Internal Revenue determined a net tax deficiency for the year 1956 of $65.59. The deficiency was asserted for failure of the Plaintiffs to include as additional income the sum of $284.48 representing the expense of J. C. Thomas' employer, Liberty National Life Insurance Company, (sometimes hereinafter referred to as the Company) incurred by it for the expense of attendance by taxpayers at a meeting of the Torch Club of the Company held at Hotel Chamberlin, Fort Monroe, Virginia, from May 16th to May 20th, 1956. After exhausting administrative procedures provided by law, taxpayers did, on April 18, 1958, pay to the Defendant the asserted deficiency with interest thereon totaling $66.35. On May 16, 1958, Plaintiffs filed with the Defendant their Claim for Refund of such sum alleged to have been erroneously assessed and collected. The Claim for Refund was denied by the Defendant by registered mail on May 22, 1958. Thereupon, on June 2, 1958, Plaintiffs filed this action.
2. Plaintiff, J. C. Thomas, was employed by the Company in 1955 and 1956 as a field representative working in one of its district offices in Birmingham.
3. To attend this meeting, Plaintiffs departed from Birmingham on May 14, 1956, spent two nights en route at a place of public lodging, and arrived at Hotel Chamberlin on May 16th. They departed from the Hotel Chamberlin on May 20th, and spent one night at a public lodging en route to Birmingham and reached home on May 21st. Plaintiffs used their own automobile bearing all the expenses therefor. Prior to the departure of Plaintiffs from Birmingham, J. C. Thomas received from his employer a check for $168.16 to be used for expense of transportation, meals and lodging to and from the meeting place. All of this sum was expended by Plaintiffs for these purposes.
4. The Company paid direct to the hotel $103.40 for the Plaintiffs' lodging and meals at the hotel while attending the meeting. The Company also paid direct to a travel agency the sum of $12.92 representing the expenses of a sightseeing trip to Williamsburg, Virginia. These expenses totaled $284.48, the asserted deficiency in income which produced the asserted tax deficiency of $65.59.
5. Annual conventions of the Torch Club of the Company are the culminating features of the training program of the agency department of the Company for its field representatives. The Torch Club originated in 1931 and is composed each year of outstanding field representatives of the Company who have, during the preceding year, attained certain standards, evidenced high abilities, and made outstanding contributions to the Company in their chosen field. Membership in the Torch Club is attained by invitation from the Company upon qualification by attaining pre-announced goals. It is the Company's experience that those representatives who attain the pre-announced goals are more apt for the type of instruction received at such meetings and for positions of leadership in the Company.
6. The Company requires those employees, agents, supervisors, superintendents, home office officials who are invited and their spouses to attend the annual meetings of the Torch Club. This requirement is not a condition of continued employment, but failure to attend without adequate reason is frowned upon and adversely affects his future promotion. So that the selection of those to attend may be objective and afford equal opportunity to all field representatives, as well as to properly provide an incentive and...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Patterson v. Thomas
...and the deductions ought to have been allowed. I therefore respectfully dissent. Rehearing denied; JOHN R. BROWN, J., dissented. 1 189 F.Supp. 230. 2 The requirements for membership in the Torch Club are "based upon sales of new business and the conservation of old 3 Taxpayer and his wife d......
-
Rudolph v. United States, Civ. No. 8317.
...a monetary way. Now the reasoning from these two propositions—let us see what is true here. The recent Alabama case, Thomas v. Patterson, D.C.N.D.Ala., 189 F. Supp. 230, was for attending a convention at Fort Monroe in Virginia. It does not appear where the office of the company is—the insu......