- 14 -
and all claims”, including claims based on sex discrimination,
against Heartland in exchange for $7,650. However, the
settlement agreement did not specifically carve out any portion
of the settlement payment as a settlement on account of personal
physical injury or physical sickness, let alone make reference to
a physical injury or a physical sickness, if any, resulting from
any sex discrimination by Heartland. Because the settlement
agreement did not allocate any part of the settlement payment on
account of a personal physical injury or physical sickness, and
there is no evidence in the record to support such an allocation,
we are not in a position to conclude that any part of the
settlement payment was on account of physical injury or physical
sickness. In sum, we are unable to find that any portion of the
$7,650 settlement payment was intended to compensate Mrs. Prasil
for a personal physical injury or physical sickness.
In view of the foregoing, we hold that the $7,650 settlement
payment that Mrs. Prasil received in 1999 in settlement of a sex
discrimination claim against her former employer is includable in
petitioners’ gross income for 1999. Accordingly, we sustain
respondent’s determination in this regard.
We have considered all of the other arguments made by
petitioners and, to the extent that we have not specifically
addressed them, we conclude they are without merit.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011