- 10 -
wrongful termination, petitioners are not entitled to exclude from
income any part of the proceeds received.
Petitioners have not proven what portion, if any, of the
$1,125,000 payment was received in settlement of tort or tortlike
claims. The General Release does not make any allocation between
tort (or tortlike) claims and other types of claims. The General
Release identifies many potential claims which could be interpreted
as sounding in contract or in tort. Thus, from the record before
us it is impossible to differentiate the actual basis for
settlement. And failure to show the specific amount of the payment
allocable to the claims of tort or tortlike damages for personal
injuries results in the entire amount's being presumed not to be
excludable. See Taggi v. United States, 35 F.3d 93, 96 (2d Cir.
1994); Getty v. Commissioner, 91 T.C. 160, 175-176 (1988), affd. on
this issue and revd. on other issues 913 F.2d 1486 (9th Cir. 1990).
Petitioner asserts that the General Release settled his claim
for damages for personal injuries. We do not agree. The General
Release does not state that the amount petitioner received was paid
to settle a potential personal injury claim against WC. And where
a settlement agreement lacks express language stating what the
settlement amount was paid to settle, then the most important factor
is the intent of the payor. Knuckles v. Commissioner, 349 F.2d 610,
612-613 (10th Cir. 1965), affg. T.C. Memo. 1964-33.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011