- 12 -
On March 8, 1995, the Court filed its memorandum opinion in
Dorsey v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1995-97.8 Once again, we
relied heavily on Hylton v. Commissioner, supra, in holding that
the taxpayer's Transfer Refund was not received on account of the
taxpayer's retirement, but rather on account of the taxpayer's
election to transfer from the Retirement System to the Pension
System.
On April 4, 1995, the Court filed Adler v. Commissioner,
T.C. Memo. 1995-148, revd. 86 F.3d 378 (4th Cir. 1996). That
case, which was decided after a trial at which a representative
of the Maryland State Retirement Agency testified, presented
facts virtually indistinguishable from those in the present case.
Thus, in Adler, the taxpayer, a Maryland State employee, elected
to transfer from the Retirement System to the Pension System,
effective June 1, 1990. The taxpayer also applied to retire,
effective July 1, 1990. Thereafter, the taxpayer received a
Transfer Refund. Applying the same analysis as in Hylton v.
Commissioner, supra, we held in Adler that the taxpayer did not
receive the Transfer Refund on account of his retirement, but
rather on account of his election to transfer from the Retirement
System to the Pension System.
8 The taxpayer's appeal in Dorsey was ultimately
dismissed. Dorsey v. Commissioner, 91 F.3d 129 (4th Cir. 1996).
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011