- 4 - Ball never asserted a claim for personal injuries (or any other claim) against Revlon. See Glynn v. Commissioner, 76 T.C. 116, 121 (1981) (stating "Here, no claim for personal injury was ever made."), affd. without published opinion 676 F.2d 682 (1st Cir. 1982). Moreover, petitioners did not establish that the amounts received were intended to compensate for a tort claim relating to personal injuries sustained by Ms. Ball. To the contrary, the agreement encompassed any claim arising "under any federal, state or local statute * * *, regulation or ordinance, under the common law or in equity * * *, or under any policy, agreement, understanding, or promise, written or oral, formal or informal, between" Revlon and Ms. Ball. Thus, the agreement contained a general release which encompassed a wide variety of potential tort and contract claims. Therefore, petitioners have failed to establish that the payments were received on account of personal injuries and were attributable to a claim based on tort or tort type rights. Accordingly, we hold that the $8,705.59 is not excludable from petitioners' gross income. All other arguments made by the parties are either irrelevant or without merit. To reflect concessions, Decision will be entered for respondent.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4
Last modified: May 25, 2011