Kevin Wade Hamblin - Page 4




                                        - 3 -                                         

          See also King v. Commissioner, 115 T.C. 118 (2000);2 Interim Rule           
          325.                                                                        
               Some of the facts were stipulated.  Those facts, with the              
          annexed exhibits, are so found and are incorporated herein by               
          reference.  At the time the petition was filed, petitioner was a            
          legal resident of Canon City, Colorado.                                     
               Petitioner was an employee of PayLess Drug Stores Northwest,           
          Inc. (PayLess), in Colorado from sometime during 1991 until June            
          23, 1992.  He worked in several different positions, including              
          that of floor supervisor, although his assignments varied,                  
          ranging from stocking shelves to the supervision of employees.              
          Shortly after his employment began with PayLess, petitioner                 
          realized that his employer was overly demanding.  He and other              
          employees were required to work from 80 to 100 hours per week, at           
          least 6 and sometimes 7 days per week.  He found the work                   
          overwhelming and finally realized he could no longer bear the               



               2    In the notice of deficiency, respondent disallowed the            
          earned income credit of $2,961 claimed on petitioner's joint                
          return for 1995 for the reason that the inclusion of petitioner's           
          class action award in income exceeded the earned income amount as           
          provided in sec. 32(a)(2) and (b).  If the Court sustains                   
          respondent on the class action income issue, respondent's                   
          adjustment disallowing the earned income credit would likewise be           
          sustained; however, the question of whether petitioner is                   
          entitled to relief from joint liability under sec. 6015 with                
          respect to the trade or business income attributable to his                 
          former spouse would remain.  Additional information regarding               
          petitioner's 1995 joint return relative to this issue is provided           
          later in the body of the opinion.                                           





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011