- 12 -
without published opinion 676 F.2d 682 (1st Cir. 1982); Seay v.
Commissioner, supra.
The dispute between the parties in the instant case relates
to how much of the settlement amount at issue Mr. Rodman paid to
petitioner on account of physical injuries. It is petitioner’s
position that the entire $200,000 settlement amount at issue is
excludable from his gross income under section 104(a)(2). In
support of that position, petitioner contends that Mr. Rodman
paid him the entire amount on account of the physical injuries
that he claimed he sustained as a result of the incident.
Respondent counters that, except for a nominal amount (i.e.,
$1), the settlement amount at issue is includable in petitioner’s
gross income. In support of that position, respondent contends
that petitioner has failed to introduce any evidence regarding,
and that Mr. Rodman was skeptical about, the extent of peti-
tioner’s physical injuries as a result of the incident. Conse-
quently, according to respondent, the Court should infer that
petitioner’s physical injuries were minimal. In further support
of respondent’s position to include all but $1 of the settlement
amount at issue in petitioner’s gross income, respondent contends
that, because the amount of any liquidated damages (i.e.,
$200,000) payable by petitioner to Mr. Rodman under the settle-
ment agreement was equal to the settlement amount (i.e.,
$200,000) paid to petitioner under that agreement, Mr. Rodman did
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011