Thomas D. Berry - Page 3




                                                - 3 -                                                  
            to petitioner and Mrs. Berry consistent with the terms of a                                
            settlement agreement that they had previously executed on March                            
            17, 1997.                                                                                  
                  Petitioner claimed a deduction in the amount of $220,000 for                         
            alimony on his Federal income tax return for 1996.  Respondent                             
            subsequently issued a notice of deficiency determining a $62,811                           
            deficiency in petitioner’s income tax for 1996.  The deficiency                            
            is based in substantial part on respondent’s disallowance of                               
            $154,000 of the $220,000 deduction for alimony claimed by                                  
            petitioner.  Petitioner filed a timely petition with the Court                             
            challenging the notice of deficiency.                                                      
                  After respondent filed an answer to the petition, petitioner                         
            filed a Motion for Partial Summary Judgment seeking a summary                              
            adjudication that his payment of $154,000 of Mrs. Berry’s                                  
            attorney’s fees pursuant to the State court’s August 28, 1996,                             
            order constituted alimony within the meaning of section 71 that                            
            is deductible under section 215.  Respondent filed an objection                            
            to petitioner’s motion, to which petitioner filed a reply.                                 
                  This matter was called for hearing at the Court’s motions                            
            session in Washington, D.C.  Counsel for respondent appeared at                            
            the hearing and made an oral Cross Motion for Partial Summary                              
            Judgment that petitioner’s payment of Mrs. Berry’s attorney’s                              
            fees does not constitute alimony within the meaning of section                             
            71.  Although no appearance was made by or on behalf of                                    






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

Last modified: May 25, 2011