1963 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 46">*46 Opinion in
40 T.C. 1061">*1061 SUPPLEMENTAL OPINION
On September 27, 1963, this Court granted the following motions1963 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 46">*47 filed by the respondent (and not objected to by the petitioners) in these proceedings:
1. Motions to Vacate Decisions [Orders] entered on July 30, 1963.
2.
3. Motion for Reconsideration.
In addition, the Court also granted the Motion to Withdraw Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction filed by counsel for Arthur Overgaard, Transferee, in Docket No. 94219. Since this motion has been granted, it has become unnecessary for us to consider whether the notice of transferee liability mailed to Overgaard on June 15, 1961, was untimely because such issue is no longer before us. Therefore, all parts of the prior opinion relating to Overgaard are withdrawn.
The proceeding in Badger Materials, Inc., Docket No. 88818, was before the Court on the petitioner's motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction based on two grounds: (1) That Badger Materials, Inc., had no legal existence at the time of filing the petition herein since no person had the requisite capacity at that time to act on behalf of 40 T.C. 1061">*1062 the dissolved corporation; and (2) that the statutory notice of deficiency was mailed1963 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 46">*48 after the applicable period for assessment against the corporate petitioner had expired. We have found that Badger Materials, Inc., ceased to exist for all purposes under Wisconsin law 2 on November 4, 1959, which was 2 years after the date of its dissolution.
1963 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 46">*49 It is clear from our opinion in
Finally, on our own motion (
A new order granting the corporate petitioner's motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction will be entered and the proceeding dismissed.
1. Proceedings of the following petitioners are consolidated herewith: Stanley Mashuda, Docket No. 89942; Bernie Mashuda, Docket No. 89943; Frank Mashuda, Docket No. 89944; Josephine Mashuda, Docket No. 89945; H. M. Nelson, Docket No. 89946; J. A. Gallagher, Docket No. 89947; and Arthur Overgaard, Docket No. 94219.↩
2. The length of time a corporation continues to exist as a body corporate depends upon the law of the State where the corporation was created.
"Survival of remedy after dissolution
"The dissolution of a corporation shall not take away or impair any remedy available to or against such corporation, its directors, or shareholders, for any right or claim existing or any liability incurred, prior to such dissolution if suit or other proceeding thereon is commenced within 2 years after the date of such dissolution. Any such suit or proceeding by or against the corporation may be prosecuted or defended by the corporation in its corporate name. The shareholders, directors and officers shall have power to take such corporate or other action as shall be appropriate to protect such remedy, right or claim. If such corporation was dissolved by the expiration of its period of duration, such corporation may amend its articles of incorporation at any time during such period of 2 years so as to extend its period of duration."↩