Court Opinion

ID: 9443237
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-03 19:15:15.727266+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:29:25.234256
License: Public Domain

DUFFY, Circuit Judge
(dissenting).
Porter and Company was a partnership consisting of employees of plaintiff. It was a device used solely for convenience in the transferring of securities. It did not own any assets and did not engage in any other business, and was completely subject to plaintiff’s control. In fact it did not have a substantial identity of existence of its own. It was, as the majority opinion points out, merely a conduit.
*477The Manufacturers Trust Company was merely plaintiff’s custodian. It held plaintiff’s assets for safe-keeping only, never having title or interest in any of the securities placed in its possession.
Only a single purchase transaction upon which the government has assessed second and third documentary stamp taxes is under our consideration. As plaintiff did not relinquish any interest in its securities or vest title in them in either the nominee or the custodian, I think the decision of the trial court was correct. In spite of the broad language used in Founders General Corp. v. Hocy, Collector of Internal Revenue, 300 U.S. 268, 57 S.Ct. 457, 81 L.Ed. 639, I would affirm.