Russell A. Condello - Page 2

                                        - 2 -                                         

               The issues for decision are:  (1) Whether petitioner may               
          exclude from his income one-half of his wages, Schedule C                   
          insurance business income, interest income, dividend income, and            
          capital gains distribution pursuant to Texas community property             
          law; (2) whether petitioner is entitled to Schedule A, C, and E             
          deductions in amounts greater than those respondent allowed in              
          the statutory notice of deficiency; (3) whether petitioner is               
          liable for self-employment tax; (4) whether petitioner is                   
          entitled to dependency exemptions for his two children; (5)                 
          whether petitioner is entitled to file as head of household; and            
          (6) whether petitioner is liable for an addition to tax for                 
          failure to file a timely return.                                            
                                  FINDINGS OF FACT                                    
               Oral stipulations of fact were made at trial.2  The oral               
          stipulation of facts and the referenced exhibits are incorporated           
          herein by this reference.  Petitioner resided in Dallas, Texas,             
          at the time he filed his petition.                                          
               On May 2, 1987, petitioner married Carol L. Condello (Mrs.             
          Condello).  In 1991, petitioner and Mrs. Condello separated.                
          During 1992, they were engaged in an acrimonious divorce                    
          proceeding and did not reside together.  On March 29, 1994, a               
          final decree of divorce was rendered.                                       


               2 These stipulations were made pursuant to a Rule 91(f)                
          hearing.                                                                    




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011