- 32 -
monthly invoices 0014 and 001516 covering the period from May 1
through July 2, 1995.17 That is because Mr. Palmer did not submit
those invoices to Mr. Harris until after the June 2, 1995 oral
modification was made, and Olin Ordnance’s invoice review process
and invoice payment authorization process had not been completed
with respect to those invoices as of the time of that modifica-
tion. On the present record, we find that the June 2, 1995 oral
modification was made before the amount that Olin Ordnance owed to
Mr. Palmer with respect to each of his approved monthly invoices
0014 and 0015 was due.
In support of their position that the oral modification of
the Marion plant/Palmer consulting agreement, which they contend
was effective as of September 12, 1994, and which we have found
was effective as of June 2, 1995, precludes application of the
constructive-receipt doctrine, petitioners rely on Martin v.
Commissioner, 96 T.C. 814 (1991), Robinson v. Commissioner, 44
T.C. 20 (1965), Oates v. Commissioner, 18 T.C. 570 (1952), affd.
207 F.2d 711 (7th Cir. 1953), Veit v. Commissioner, 8 T.C. 809
(1947), and Kimbell v. Commissioner, 41 B.T.A. 940 (1940). We
find all of those cases to be distinguishable from the instant
case and petitioners’ reliance on them to be misplaced. In each
16See our discussion below with respect to Mr. Palmer’s
approved monthly invoice 0016 covering the period from July 3
through July 30, 1995.
17See supra note 2.
Page: Previous 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011