Hetzel

Hetzel v. Franchise Tax Board

Good Law
161 Cal. App. 2d 224·1958 Cal. App. LEXIS 1721·326 P.2d 611
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 10, 1958Civ. 22876California3,299 words

Opinion

Opinion

Kincaid, J.

Appellant (hereinafter called Hetzel) sues for a refund of $500 paid to the Franchise Tax Board (hereinafter called the Tax Board) on account of the principal of additional personal income taxes of $14,330.11 for the calendar year 1951.

The appeal is on the judgment roll from a judgment dismissing the complaint. The record consists of the complaint, answer, appellant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings, and respondent’s countermotion for judgment on the pleadings. Appellant’s motion was denied and respondent’s motion granted, dismissing the complaint.

The undisputed material facts are as follows:

During the year 1951 Hetzel was engaged in the bookmaking business in the city of San Diego, California. Bookmaking in 1951 was illegal in the State of California under the provisions of section 337, subdivision (a) of the Penal Code. Except for an item of income from a trust amounting to $18.68 his bookmaking activities were his only source of income. Hetzel on his California personal income tax return for 1951 reported the amount of $15,859.49 as net profit from his bookmaking business. On a supporting schedule attached to the return he reported winnings of $482,829.60, losses of…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.