- 38 -
invoices 0011 through 0015, those cases do not require us to
conclude that the constructive-receipt doctrine is inapplicable to
the amount of nonemployee compensation reflected in each of those
invoices 0011 through 0015. We reach these conclusions because
the July 1995 amendment is distinguishable from the binding
contracts or agreements involved in the cases on which petitioners
rely. Unlike those binding contracts or agreements, we find on
the record before us that paragraph 6 of the July 1995 amendment,
like the June 2, 1995 oral modification of paragraph 6 of the
Marion plant/Palmer consulting agreement, did not impose a sub-
stantial limitation or restriction on Mr. Palmer’s control of the
receipt of the amount of nonemployee compensation that Olin
Ordnance owed to him with respect to each of his approved monthly
invoices 0011 through 0016. Regardless of when the July 1995
amendment was effective, pursuant to paragraph 6 of that amend-
ment, Olin Ordnance was ready, willing, and able to pay Mr. Palmer
the amount that it owed to him with respect to each of his ap-
proved monthly invoices which was subject to the Marion plant/
Palmer consulting agreement as modified by that amendment within
30 days after Olin Ordnance first received each such invoice.
Pursuant to the July 1995 amendment, it was totally within Mr.
Palmer’s control whether Olin Ordnance paid each such amount to
Mr. Palmer within 30 days after the date on which Olin Ordnance
first received each such invoice or deferred its payment to him of
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