Barbara Ann McMahon - Page 3




                                        - 2 -                                         
          effect for the year in issue, and all Rule references are to the            
          Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure.                                  
               Respondent determined a deficiency in petitioner’s Federal             
          income tax of $9,895 for the taxable year 1995.                             
               The issue for decision is whether certain amounts petitioner           
          received from her former husband are includable in her income as            
          alimony or separate maintenance payments.1                                  
               Some of the facts have been stipulated and are so found.               
          The stipulations of fact and the attached exhibits are                      
          incorporated herein by this reference.  Petitioner resided in               
          Ridgefield, Connecticut, on the date the petition was filed in              
          this case.                                                                  
               Petitioner and her former husband, George R. Reed, separated           
          in April 1993.  Mr. Reed filed a petition for divorce on December           
          10, 1993, in the Circuit Court, Seventh Judicial District, for              
          St. Johns County, Florida.  On December 23, 1993, Mr. Reed filed            
          with the circuit court a Motion to Establish Temporary Child                
          Support and Other Temporary Relief.  Petitioner separately sought           
          temporary support from Mr. Reed by filing with the court a motion           
          for Application for Temporary Allowances.  This latter motion was           
          argued before the court with counsel representing both petitioner           


          1In the petition, petitioner disputes the interest due on                   
          the deficiency.  This Court does not have jurisdiction to                   
          redetermine interest in this case prior to the entry of a                   
          decision redetermining the deficiency.  See sec. 7481(c); Rule              
          261; Pen Coal Corp. v. Commissioner, 107 T.C. 249, 255 (1996).              




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

Last modified: May 25, 2011