Emanoil and Magdalena Gantea - Page 7

                                        - 6 -                                         
          cannot be clearly discerned from the settlement agreement, the              
          intent of the payor must be determined from all the facts and               
          circumstances of the case, including the complaint filed and                
          details surrounding the litigation.  Robinson v. Commissioner,              
          supra at 127.                                                               
               We start our analysis with the second requirement of                   
          Commissioner v. Schleier, supra.  The “taxpayer must show that              
          the damages were received ‘on account of personal injuries or               
          sickness.’”  Id. at 337.  Subsequent to the Court’s opinion in              
          Schleier, Congress amended section 104(a)2 to provide that                  
          amounts are excludable only if received “on account of personal             
          physical injuries or physical sickness”.  Sec. 104(a)(2)                    
          (emphasis added).                                                           
               Petitioners stipulated that no portion of the damages was              
          paid on account of “physical injuries or physical sickness”, and            
          that should end the matter.                                                 
               To the extent, however, that petitioners contend that they             
          should not be bound by the stipulation of facts,3 even if they              
          had not entered into the stipulation, the result is the same.               

               2  Small Business Job Protection Act of 1996, Pub. L. 104-             
          188, sec. 1605, 110 Stat. 1838, effective for amounts received              
          after Aug. 20, 1996.                                                        
               3  In their posttrial memorandum, petitioners suggest that             
          they were unduly pressured into signing the stipulation of facts.           
          For the reasons stated above, we do not find it necessary to                
          decide that issue.  We note, however, there is nothing in the               
          record to support that allegation.                                          





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

Last modified: May 25, 2011