- 16 -
Legal expenses incident to medical care have been allowed as
a medical expense deduction only when the legal expenses are
"'necessary to legitimate a method of medical treatment'".
Levine v. Commissioner, 695 F.2d 57, 61 (2d Cir. 1982), affg.
T.C. Memo. 1981-437 (quoting Gerstacker v. Commissioner, supra at
453). Petitioner's action against the Portland School District
was not to legitimate medical treatment. Rather, petitioner
instituted the legal action to ensure that Daniel could receive
medical treatment that was arguably necessary to treat his
cognitive deficits without petitioner's having to bear the
financial burden of that treatment. The legal action against the
Portland School District, had petitioner been successful, would
not have alleviated or treated Daniel's learning disabilities or
psychological problems. It would have merely alleviated the
financial burden often faced by families in providing medical
care to their family members.
Petitioner asks us to expand the holding of Gerstacker v.
Commissioner, supra, to the situation where a taxpayer institutes
legal proceedings to seek payment for the costs of medical care
that is otherwise obtainable and possibly already received. We
find that there is not a proximate relationship between the legal
expenses incurred to obtain reimbursement for medical care and
the medical care received. Petitioner's legal expenses are not
deductible medical expenses under section 213. While the legal
expenses in issue may be connected to the son's treatment, they
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