- 8 -
The doctrine of stare decisis generally requires that we
follow the holding of a previously decided case, absent special
justification. Sec. State Bank v. Commissioner, 111 T.C. 210,
213-214 (1998), affd. 214 F.3d 1254 (10th Cir. 2000). After
reviewing petitioners’ arguments in support of their position
that the right to receive future annual lottery payments
constitutes a capital asset, we find nothing therein that would
cause us to refrain from applying the doctrine of stare decisis.
Accordingly, we rely on the legal analysis in Davis and hold that
(1) the right in this case to receive the future lottery payments
does not constitute a capital asset within the meaning of section
1221, and (2) the lump-sum payment of $4,485,000 received from
Singer in exchange for that right is ordinary income.
Decision will be entered
for respondent.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Last modified: May 25, 2011