- 35 -
that, and consequently Olin Ordnance did not pay him the amount
that it owed to him with respect to each such invoice until a date
selected by Mr. Palmer.
Based on our examination of the entire record in this case,
we find that petitioners have failed to establish that the June 2,
1995 oral modification of the Marion plant/Palmer consulting
agreement precludes application of the constructive-receipt
doctrine to the amounts of nonemployee compensation that Olin
Ordnance owed to Mr. Palmer with respect to his approved monthly
invoices 0011 through 0015.
In further support of their position that Mr. Palmer did not
constructively receive during 1995 any amount of nonemployee
compensation from Olin Ordnance, petitioners rely on paragraph 6
of the July 1995 amendment to the Marion plant/Palmer consulting
agreement. Paragraph 6 of that amendment deleted the last sen-
tence of paragraph 6 of the Marion plant/Palmer consulting agree-
ment and inserted the following sentences in its place:
Correct invoices submitted for payment to Mr. R.R.
Harris for approval shall be paid within thirty (30)
calendar days of the date of receipt, or deferred to a
mutually agreed upon future date, but not later than
January 31, 1997. In addition, Olin agrees to pay
Consultant the equivalent of 5% annual simple interest
on any deferred payments.
Petitioners maintain (1) that the July 1995 amendment was effec-
tive as of September 12, 1994, prior to the respective dates on
which the amount of nonemployee compensation reflected in peti-
Page: Previous 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011