Uploaded April 2025 | Updated September 2026, 2 weeks ago
Get more case briefs explained with Quimbee. Quimbee has over 42,700 case briefs (and counting) keyed to 988 casebooks ► quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
South Central Bell Telephone Co. v. Barthelemy
Louisiana Supreme Court
643 So. 2d 1240 (1994)
In South Central Bell Telephone Company versus Barthelemy, we'll see whether computer software can be considered corporeal property.
South Central Bell operated a phone system in New Orleans, Louisiana.
Bell's offices contained switching equipment that ran custom computer software that transferred calls. From nineteen eighty six to nineteen ninety, Bell licensed computer software for its switching equipment from other phone companies. The companies delivered the switching equipment software to Bell on physical magnetic tapes.
During the same period, Bell also entered into a licensing agreement with its affiliate company to use the affiliate's data processing software.
The affiliate company transferred the data processing software electronically through phone lines to Bell's Computers, which were located in New Orleans.
Under the New Orleans city code, the city imposed a tax on retail sales of tangible personal property. The city classified both the switching equipment software and the data processing software as tangible property.
As a result, the city levied taxes on Bell for its use of both software programs.
Bell paid the taxes in full under protest. Bell then sued the city to recover the taxes it paid under protest.
Bell argued that the software wasn't taxable because software isn't tangible property.
The trial court agreed and held that software isn't tangible personal property.
The city appealed.
The court of appeals affirmed the trial court's holding. The court of appeals held that software was incorporeal property because software was intellectual property.
The city, represented by New Orleans mayor Sydney Barthelemy, appealed.
The Louisiana Supreme Court granted cert.
Want more details on this case? Get the rule of law, issues, holding and reasonings, and more case facts here: quimbee.com/cases/south-central-bell-telephone-co-v-barthelemy
The Quimbee App features over 42,700 case briefs keyed to 988 casebooks. Try it free for 7 days! ► quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
Have Questions about this Case? Submit your questions and get answers from a real attorney here: quimbee.com/cases/south-central-bell-telephone-co-v-barthelemy
Did we just become best friends? Stay connected to Quimbee here:
Subscribe to our YouTube Channel ► youtube.com/subscription_center?add_user=QuimbeeDotCom
Quimbee Case Brief App ► quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
Facebook ► facebook.com/quimbeedotcom
Twitter ► twitter.com/quimbeedotcom
#casebriefs #lawcases #casesummaries
Get more case briefs explained with Quimbee. Quimbee has over 42,700 case briefs (and counting) keyed to 988 casebooks ► quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
South Central Bell Telephone Co. v. Barthelemy
Louisiana Supreme Court
643 So. 2d 1240 (1994)
In South Central Bell Telephone Company versus Barthelemy, we'll see whether computer software can be considered corporeal property.
South Central Bell operated a phone system in New Orleans, Louisiana.
Bell's offices contained switching equipment that ran custom computer software that transferred calls. From nineteen eighty six to nineteen ninety, Bell licensed computer software for its switching equipment from other phone companies. The companies delivered the switching equipment software to Bell on physical magnetic tapes.
During the same period, Bell also entered into a licensing agreement with its affiliate company to use the affiliate's data processing software.
The affiliate company transferred the data processing software electronically through phone lines to Bell's Computers, which were located in New Orleans.
Under the New Orleans city code, the city imposed a tax on retail sales of tangible personal property. The city classified both the switching equipment software and the data processing software as tangible property.
As a result, the city levied taxes on Bell for its use of both software programs.
Bell paid the taxes in full under protest. Bell then sued the city to recover the taxes it paid under protest.
Bell argued that the software wasn't taxable because software isn't tangible property.
The trial court agreed and held that software isn't tangible personal property.
The city appealed.
The court of appeals affirmed the trial court's holding. The court of appeals held that software was incorporeal property because software was intellectual property.
The city, represented by New Orleans mayor Sydney Barthelemy, appealed.
The Louisiana Supreme Court granted cert.
Want more details on this case? Get the rule of law, issues, holding and reasonings, and more case facts here: quimbee.com/cases/south-central-bell-telephone-co-v-barthelemy
The Quimbee App features over 42,700 case briefs keyed to 988 casebooks. Try it free for 7 days! ► quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
Have Questions about this Case? Submit your questions and get answers from a real attorney here: quimbee.com/cases/south-central-bell-telephone-co-v-barthelemy
Did we just become best friends? Stay connected to Quimbee here:
Subscribe to our YouTube Channel ► youtube.com/subscription_center?add_user=QuimbeeDotCom
Quimbee Case Brief App ► quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
Facebook ► facebook.com/quimbeedotcom
Twitter ► twitter.com/quimbeedotcom
#casebriefs #lawcases #casesummaries
