- 2 - Marvin B. Starr, for petitioner. Margaret A. Martin, for respondent. OPINION LARO, Judge: The case is before the Court on respondent’s motion for summary judgment.1 Respondent moves for summary adjudication in her favor, arguing that proceeds received by petitioner in settlement of a lawsuit are not within section 104(a)(2) for lack of a personal injury. Respondent supports her motion with the pleadings and the following exhibits: (1) Petitioner’s 1989 Form 1120, U.S. Corporation Income Tax Return; (2) petitioner’s “FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES” (the Complaint), which was filed in the Superior Court of the State of California mainly against three individuals, three corporations, a California limited partnership, and 50 Does (the Defendants); (3) the settlement agreement (the Agreement) that resolved the litigation surrounding the Complaint; and (4) the subject notice of deficiency. Petitioner objects to respondent’s motion, alleging that the settlement proceeds would have been within section 104(a)(2) if its president/sole shareholder, John Magaddino, had operated its business as a sole 1 Petitioner petitioned the Court to redetermine respondent’s determination of an $85,528 deficiency in its taxable year ended Sept. 30, 1990.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011