- 12 -
Although petitioner states correctly that one or more courts had
adopted positions that were ultimately rejected by the U.S.
Supreme Court in deciding those cases, that does not mean, as
petitioner asks us to hold, that we should apply the prior
positions in lieu of the high Court's decisions. According to a
recent mandate of the Court on the retroactive effect of its
decisions:
When this Court applies a rule of federal law to the
parties before it, that rule is the controlling
interpretation of federal law and must be given full
retroactive effect in all cases still open on direct
review and as to all events, regardless of whether such
events predate or postdate our announcement of the
rule. * * * [Harper v. Virginia Dept. of Taxation,
509 U.S. 86, 97 (1993).]
We apply the Supreme Court's decisions in O'Gilvie,
Schleier, and Burke to hold that petitioner's punitive damages
are includable in his gross income. In so holding, we have
considered all arguments made by petitioner and, to the extent
not discussed above, find them to be without merit. To reflect
the foregoing,
Decision will be entered
for respondent.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Last modified: May 25, 2011