Montgomery Coca-Cola Bottling Co. v. United States

In my opinion this case turns wholly on the factual issue of whether the parties to the 1958 agreements intended the 20-cent gallonage fee to be, on the one hand, payment for *383the Coca-Cola franchise or, on the other hand, an additional payment for the use of the tangible real and personal property. Unlike the court, I consider the parties’ intention in 1958 to be crucial because I think that they could legitimately decide (especially in view of the position, testified to by plaintiffs’ experts and accepted by the trial judge, that the franchise had no fixed or measurable value for plaintiff)…