- 12 - commuting expenses between dual residences and provided an exception to the general rule denying deductibility of these expenses.1 In United States v. Le Blanc, 278 F.2d 571 (5th Cir. 1960), the Court of Appeals held that where a Louisiana Supreme Court Justice (Justice Le Blanc) was required by the State constitution to maintain his district residence during his term in office, he was allowed to deduct the rental expenses of an apartment in New Orleans during his attendance on the court in the latter city. Justice Le Blanc's district residence was approximately 75 miles from New Orleans, and after his work on the court was completed each week, he returned to his home district for the weekend. Id. at 573. The State constitution required the Justices to maintain residency in their district for the 2 years prior to election and provided for the immediate vacating of the 1 The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit has also addressed this issue. In Barnhill v. Commissioner, 148 F.2d 913 (4th Cir. 1945), the Court of Appeals held that a North Carolina Supreme Court Justice who maintained his district residence while attending court sessions in the State capital could not deduct his travel expenses. The Justice involved in that case maintained his district residence as a matter of personal choice while serving on the court. Id. at 914. His presence was required in the State capital while the court was in session, but not otherwise. Id. The Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit has distinguished Barnhill v. Commissioner, supra, from United States v. Le Blanc, 278 F.2d 571 (5th Cir. 1960), on the basis that in the latter, the State required the Justices to maintain their district residences. Ireland v. United States, 621 F.2d 731, 735 (5th Cir. 1980); Steinhort v. Commissioner, 335 F.2d 496, 503 (5th Cir. 1964), affg. and remanding T.C. Memo. 1962-233.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011