Westover

Smith v. Westover

Good Law
123 F. Supp. 354·46 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 349·1954 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3009
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaJune 24, 1954No. 15161California1,242 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Yankwich, J.

The above-entitled cause heretofore tried, argued and submitted, is now decided as follows:

Judgment will be for the defendants that the plaintiffs take nothing by the Complaint. Costs to the defendants. Findings of Fact and Judgment to be prepared by counsel for the defendants according to Local Rule 7.

.Comment.

The plaintiffs Jack Smith and Rose Mae Smith, husband and wife, seek to recover income taxes paid for the years *355 1943 and 1946, and interest. The claim arises out of a family partnership in the wholesale shoe business known as the Boston Shoe Company, successfully established by the plaintiff Jack Smith before his marriage to the plaintiff Rose Mae Smith. After marriage the spouses considered that the business was community property to which the husband’s earning capacity had contributed. On December 31, 1942, the husband bought the wife’s interest for the sum of $102,-933.89, the purchase price being represented by four promissory notes in different amounts, with different due dates, one year apart, given by him to his wife on the same date.

On September 29, 1943, two trusts were created for the benefit of the children of Jack and Rose Mae Smith, one designated…

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.