Norman L. and Catherine J. Forste - Page 27

                                       - 27 -                                         
          the taxpayer otherwise fails to establish the specific portion of           
          the settlement amount, if any, that was paid on account of those            
          claims, the entire amount has been held to be taxable.18  See               
          Pipitone v. United States, 180 F.3d 859, 865 (7th Cir. 1999);               
          Taggi v. United States, 35 F.3d 93, 96 (2d Cir. 1994); Broedel v.           
          Commissioner, supra; Laguaite v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2000-             
          103; Phillips v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1997-336; Sodoma v.               
          Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1996-275, affd. without published                  
          opinion 139 F.3d 899 (5th Cir. 1998).19  On the basis of the                

               18This follows from the rule that a general release of tort            
          and nontort claims does not satisfy the requirements of sec.                
          104(a)(2) in the absence of some express allocation or other                
          evidence of payor intent.  See Ball v. Commissioner, 163 F.3d 308           
          (5th Cir. 1998), affg. T.C. Memo. 1997-549; Bland v.                        
          Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2000-98; Sherman v. Commissioner, T.C.             
          Memo. 1999-202; Brennan v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1997-317.               
               19For example, in Sherman v. Commissioner, supra, we held:             
               As in Taggi, the release in this case is all-                          
               encompassing and includes different potential tort and                 
               nontort claims.  As stated, no part of the payment was                 
               allocated to any one cause of action.  And, petitioner                 
               has not proven which portion, if any, of the $207,000                  
               was received in settlement of tort or tort type claims                 
               of personal injury. * * *                                              
          In Wise v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1998-4, we held:                        
                    Petitioners have not proven what portion, if any,                 
               of the $1,125,000 payment was received in settlement of                
               tort or tortlike claims.  * * *  And failure to show                   
               the specific amount of the payment allocable to the                    
               claims of tort or tortlike damages for personal                        
               injuries results in the entire amount’s being presumed                 
               not to be excludable.  See Taggi v. United States, 35                  
               F.3d 93, 96 (2d Cir. 1994); Getty v. Commissioner, 91                  
                                                             (continued...)           





Page:  Previous  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011