- 12 -
years, of ongoing public attention. If neither media personnel
nor looky-loos had chosen to frequent the Brentwood Park area
after the murders, or if the period of interest and visitation
had been brief, petitioners would have lacked grounds for
alleging a permanent and devaluing change in the character of
their neighborhood. Hence, the source of their difficulties
would appear to be more akin to a steadily operating cause than
to a casualty. Press and media attention extending for months
bears little similarity to a fire, storm, or shipwreck and is not
properly classified therewith as an “other casualty”.
B. Nature of Damage Recognized as Deductible
With respect to the requisite nature of the damage itself,
this Court has traditionally held that only physical damage to or
permanent abandonment of property will be recognized as
deductible under section 165. See, e.g., Squirt Co. v.
Commissioner, supra at 547; Pulvers v. Commissioner, supra at
249-250; Citizens Bank v. Commissioner, supra at 720; Kamanski v.
Commissioner, supra. In contrast, the Court has refused to
permit deductions based upon a temporary decline in market value.
See, e.g., Squirt Co. v. Commissioner, supra at 547; Pulvers v.
Commissioner, supra at 249-250; Citizens Bank v. Commissioner,
supra at 720; Kamanski v. Commissioner, supra.
For example, in Citizens Bank v. Commissioner, supra at 720,
the Court stated that “physical damage or destruction of property
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011