James A. Picard - Page 2

                                        - 2 -                                         

          to the Court fully stipulated pursuant to Rule 122.  After                  
          concessions,2 the remaining issue for decision is whether                   
          payments made to petitioner by the City of Oakland during the               
          year in issue pursuant to the Oakland City Charter's retirement             
          provisions for public safety employees are excludable from gross            
          income under section 104(a)(1).  We hold that the payments in               
          question are not excludable.                                                
               The Court bases its findings of fact on the stipulation of             
          facts and attached exhibits, which are incorporated herein by               
          this reference.  Petitioner resided in Klamath Falls, Oregon, at            
          the time he filed the petition.  Petitioner was born on June 15,            
          1940.  He commenced employment as a member of the Police                    
          Department of the City of Oakland, California, on October 31,               
          1966.  He served on active duty until February 16, 1969, on which           
          date he suffered injuries that occurred while he was engaged in             
          the performance of his duties.  Effective April 1, 1972,                    
          petitioner was retired for disability by reason of these                    
          injuries, by action of the Oakland Police and Fire Retirement               
          Board (the Board), which found petitioner's disability to be                
          service connected.  As a result of the Board's action, effective            



               1(...continued)                                                        
          Procedure.                                                                  
               2The parties have stipulated that petitioner is not liable             
          for the addition to tax pursuant to sec. 6651(a).                           




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011