- 15 -
We have carefully considered each of the remaining issues
that we decided in Henry I. We conclude that nothing in Fabry II
requires us to change our findings as to any of those other
issues.
On careful reconsideration pursuant to the mandate of the
Court of Appeals,
Decision will be entered
for the same years in the same
amounts as previously entered
in this case.
8(...continued)
10 * * * (1992), it is only one factor. Intent of the
payor is also a factor to be considered. See Metzger
v. Commissioner, 88 T.C. 834, 347-48 * * * (1987),
aff’d. without published opinion, 845 F.2d 1013 (3d
Cir. 1988); Knuckles v. Commissioner, 349 F.2d 610
(10th Cir. 1965). * * *
Fabry v. Commissioner, 223 F.3d 1261, 1269 n.23 (11th Cir. 2000).
With respect to the intent of the payor in Henry I, it is
noteworthy that du Pont, the payor, issued two Forms 1099-MISC
relating to the $2,800,000 that it paid pursuant to the stipula-
tion of settlement, which reflected its view that that payment is
nonemployee compensation. See Henry v. Commissioner, 77 T.C.M.
(CCH) at 2216, 1999 T.C.M. (RIA) at 1248.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Last modified: May 25, 2011