- 9 -
concerning accord and satisfaction. See id.; Stoller v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1983-319. In Bones v Commissioner,
supra at 420, we concluded that “the circumstances were such that
petitioner could reasonably and prudently understand his position
to be such that if he accepted the offer which was made upon the
condition stated an accord and satisfaction would have resulted.”
A taxpayer’s subjective belief, however, is irrelevant in
determining whether the receipt of a check is subject to
substantial limitations or restrictions (i.e., whether cashing it
would have created an accord and satisfaction). Fromson v.
United States, 32 Fed. Cl. 1, 7 (1994).
Whether cashing a check would have created an accord and
satisfaction is to be resolved under State law. See id. at 7-8;
Stoller v. Commissioner, supra (holding taxpayer in constructive
receipt where taxpayer refused to cash a check purporting to
represent final payment for services performed although under New
York law, taxpayer could have cashed the check without impairing
his claim by endorsing the check “without prejudice”, “under
protest”, or the like). Accordingly, whether petitioners
constructively received $11,091.90 in 1999 turns on whether they
had a reasonable belief that cashing the check would have
impaired their claim against JTF under the law of the State of
California.
California Uniform Commercial Code section 3311 (California
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011