Court Opinion

ID: 9442939
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-03 19:04:51.026413+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:29:17.698153
License: Public Domain

SIBLEY, Circuit Judge
(concurring).
I concur in the judgment and opinion but think much emphasis ought to be laid on the fact that the one fifth interest in the 500 acre tract of land and the farm implements and machinery which is in controversy, deeded to Mrs. Britt, December 27, 1941, by the corporation, had never been the property of her husband, M. C. Britt, but belonged to the corporation which deeded it to Mrs. Britt. Mr. Britt did not own 40 per cent of the stock of that corporation, but only 28 per cent, each of his three children owning 24 per cent. When they united to deed Mrs. Britt 20 per cent, and to each of themselves twenty per cent of the property, Mr. Britt yielded to her eight per cent, and the children each four per cent. He at no time passed to her twenty per cent of this property, which appears to have been the most substantial part of the assets she received when she' became a partner. There is no basis for charging 20 per cent of the income, if any, to M. C. Britt as diverted from him to her.