- 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