Paragon Jewel Coal Company, Inc. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue Page 27

Paragon Jewel Coal Company, Inc. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue general information

Media for Paragon Jewel Coal Company, Inc. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

Audio Transcription for Oral Argument - March 08, 1965 in Paragon Jewel Coal Company, Inc. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

Frederick Bernays Wiener:

You sell only what you own.

These contractors didn't sell Paragon its own coal.

They couldn't take it elsewhere.

They couldn't give it to anyone else.

They couldn't take it on the market to see whether possibly they could make a better bargain with someone else.

It was Paragons' coal they were paid for mining.

Now, everyone of the seven factors here with a possible exception of terminability on which Your Honors rested in Parsons v. Smith is here, and the one factor which the Court in Parsons pointed to as determinative.

The one factor that dispelled the fiction of Parsons and Huss tried to persuade Your Honors to it adopt was that there had never been any surrender, any transfer, any conveyance of the capital interest in the coal in the ground.

Now, the court below disregarded the statute, disregarded the regulations rough shot over the findings.

Used -- relied on authorities that were patently not in point.

Relied on the same kind of semantiticized fiction that Parsons v. Smith rejected and reverted to the pre-Parsons decisions which it had on the basis of which Parsons was brought here under a conflict.

The court below simply ignored Parsons against Smith, maybe that to paraphrase Alexander Pope only very slightly, a court convinced against its will is also of the same opinion still but if you read Paragon -- Parsons v. Smith objectively and look at the findings actually found here, then I think Your Honors will agree with the Commissioner and with the petitioner Paragon where there must be a reversal.