Barney K. and Lindy W. Huang - Page 10

                                        - 9 -                                         
          Petitioners also paid another attorney, Janet Brown, and two                
          reporting services, Bryant Court Reporting Services, Inc., and              
          Associated Reporting & Transcription, for services rendered in              
          connection with the malicious prosecution suit.                             
               Prior to the years in issue, petitioners were involved in              
          various bankruptcy proceedings, both in their individual                    
          capacities and with respect to their status as partners in Tara,            
          the investment discussed above.  Prior to and during 1995,                  
          petitioners employed an attorney, Robert Willis, to bring a                 
          malpractice suit against a law firm which had represented                   
          petitioners with respect to their investment in Tara, the                   
          bankruptcy of Tara, and petitioners’ own personal bankruptcy.  In           
          1995 and 1996, petitioners hired another attorney, Brian                    
          Upchurch, to bring another legal malpractice suit, this time                
          against Robert Willis.                                                      
               Investment Expense                                                     
               While a deduction generally is allowed for interest expense,           
          an individual’s deduction of investment interest is subject to              
          certain limitations, and it generally may not exceed the                    
          individual’s “net investment income” for the taxable year.  Sec.            
          163(a), (d)(1); see also sec. 163(h) (disallowing any deduction             
          for “personal interest”).                                                   
               Petitioners argue that the $29,103 “investment” expense                
          listed on their 1995 return arose as follows:  Prior to being               






Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011