|
|
Helvering v. Leonard, 310 U.S. 80 (1940)
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.
Helvering v. Leonard, 310 U.S. 80 (1940)
Helvering v. Leonard No. 426 Argued March 26, 1940 Decided April 22, 1940 310 U.S. 80
CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT
Syllabus
A separation agreement providing for the support of a wife embraced a trust agreement whereby the husband contributed to the corpus securities and cash, including corporate bonds the payment of the principal and interest of which he guaranteed. The trust could be amended by the husband and wife jointly, and the husband retained a limited power of substitution in respect of certain bank stock which was part of the corpus. Otherwise the trust was irrevocable, and the husband retained no right to either the corpus or the income. A specified amount of the trust income was to be paid to each of three children; the remainder to the wife, and, upon her death, the corpus was to be held for the children. The separation agreement also obligated the husband to pay to the wife annually a certain additional sum for the support of herself and the children, subject to reduction upon application to a court of competent jurisdiction. The arrangement was approved by a decree of divorce in New York.
Held:
1. The portion of the trust income which was received from the guaranteed bonds was taxable income of the husband, under the Revenue Act of 1928. P. 84.
By the husband’s guarantee of payment of the principal and interest of the bonds, a personal obligation, though contingent, continued to exist pro tanto, and the rule of Douglas v. Willcuts, 296 U.S. 1, is applicable.
2. Other trust income also was taxable to the husband for the reason that he did not sustain the burden of showing by clear and convincing proof that the New York court lacked power after the divorce to add to his personal obligations in any eventuality. Helvering v. Fitch, 309 U.S. 149. P. 85.
105 F.2d 900 reversed.
Certiorari, 309 U.S. 644, to review a judgment reversing a decision of the Board of Tax Appeals, 36 B.T.A. 563, assessing a deficiency in income tax.
Contents:
Chicago: U.S. Supreme Court, "Syllabus," Helvering v. Leonard, 310 U.S. 80 (1940) in 310 U.S. 80 310 U.S. 81. Original Sources, accessed November 22, 2024, http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=BVYZL3S2M59DLFL.
MLA: U.S. Supreme Court. "Syllabus." Helvering v. Leonard, 310 U.S. 80 (1940), in 310 U.S. 80, page 310 U.S. 81. Original Sources. 22 Nov. 2024. http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=BVYZL3S2M59DLFL.
Harvard: U.S. Supreme Court, 'Syllabus' in Helvering v. Leonard, 310 U.S. 80 (1940). cited in 1940, 310 U.S. 80, pp.310 U.S. 81. Original Sources, retrieved 22 November 2024, from http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=BVYZL3S2M59DLFL.
|