|
United States v. Gilmore, 372 U.S. 39 (1963)
Contents:
Show Summary
Hide Summary
General SummaryThis case is from a collection containing the full text of over 16,000 Supreme Court cases from 1793 to the present. The body of Supreme Court decisions are, effectively, the final interpretation of the Constitution. Only an amendment to the Constitution can permanently overturn an interpretation and this has happened only four times in American history.
United States v. Gilmore, 372 U.S. 39 (1963)
United States v. Gilmore No. 21 Argued March 27-28, 1962 Restored to the calendar for reargument April 2, 1962 Reargued December 5-6, 1962 Decided February 18, 1963 372 U.S. 39
CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF CLAIMS
Syllabus
Respondent sued for refund of part of the income taxes paid by him for the years 1953 and 1954, on the ground that legal expenses incurred by him in defending divorce litigation with his former wife were deductible under § 23(a)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1939, as amended, which allots as deductions from gross income "ordinary and necessary expenses . . . incurred . . . for the conservation . . . of property held for the production of income." His gross income was derived almost entirely from his salary as president of three corporations which were franchised automobile dealers and from dividends from his controlling stock in such corporations. His wife had sued for divorce, alimony, and an alleged community property interest in such stock, and he alleged that, had he not succeeded in defeating these claims, he might have lost his stock, his corporate positions, and the dealer franchises, from which nearly all of his income was derived.
Held: none of respondent’s expenditures in resisting these claims is deductible under § 23(a)(2). Pp. 40-52.
(a) The origin and character of the claim with respect to which an expense was incurred, rather than its potential consequences upon the fortunes of the taxpayer, is the controlling basic test of whether the expense was "business" or "personal," and hence whether or not it is deductible under § 23(a)(2). Pp. 44-51.
(b) The wife’s claims stemmed entirely from the marital relationship, and not, under any tenable view of things, from income-producing activity. Therefore, none of respondent’s expenditures in resisting these claims can be deemed "business" expenses deductible under § 23(a)(2). Pp. 51-52.
___ Ct. Cl. ___, 290 F. 2d 942, reversed and case remanded.
Contents:
Chicago: U.S. Supreme Court, "Syllabus," United States v. Gilmore, 372 U.S. 39 (1963) in 372 U.S. 39 372 U.S. 40. Original Sources, accessed November 24, 2024, http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=4QL9Y7UH1F4D44E.
MLA: U.S. Supreme Court. "Syllabus." United States v. Gilmore, 372 U.S. 39 (1963), in 372 U.S. 39, page 372 U.S. 40. Original Sources. 24 Nov. 2024. http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=4QL9Y7UH1F4D44E.
Harvard: U.S. Supreme Court, 'Syllabus' in United States v. Gilmore, 372 U.S. 39 (1963). cited in 1963, 372 U.S. 39, pp.372 U.S. 40. Original Sources, retrieved 24 November 2024, from http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=4QL9Y7UH1F4D44E.
|