- 13 -
In Gerstacker v. Commissioner, supra, the Court of Appeals
found that the commitment proceedings were essential to render
medical treatment to the taxpayer wife. The court stated:
It seems obvious to this Court that a commitment
proceeding was necessary to render medical treatment in
the present case where Mrs. Gerstacker would not stay
in the hospital voluntarily. It also is obvious that
commitment proceedings played a role in medical
treatment, and that except for Mrs. Gerstacker's
illness these legal expenses would not have been
incurred. * * * [Id. at 450.]
The court held that where legal expenses are necessary to
"legitimate a method of medical treatment", they are proximately
related to the medical treatment and are deductible as medical
care under section 213. Id. at 453. The court further held,
however, that legal fees for the management of the guardianship
estate and the conduct of the wife's affairs during the existence
of the guardianship were not deductible as medical expenses
because these services were not essential to legitimate medical
treatment and therefore were not proximately related to the
wife's medical condition.
Petitioner argues that at the time he incurred the legal
expenses, he reasonably believed that he would not be able to
afford long-term medical treatment for Daniel at Eagle Hill
unless the Portland School District paid for at least a portion
of the costs. Accordingly, petitioner argues that the legal
proceedings against the school district were necessary to obtain
medical care for his son. Under petitioner's theory, the fact
that Daniel received the medical care despite the fact petitioner
lost the lawsuit against the school district is not relevant.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011