Purdey v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
MARGOLIS, Judge.
In this tax refund action, currently before the Court on plaintiffs’ and defendant’s cross-motions for summary judgment, plaintiffs claim that certain deductions allowed under 26 U.S.C. § 183 are also permitted in calculating plaintiffs’ Alternative Minimum Tax.
FACTS
During the years 1984, 1985, 1986, 1988, and 1989 (hereinafter “tax years at issue”), plaintiffs, William A. Purdey and Frances C. Purdey, conducted thoroughbred breeding and racing activities at their ranch in Colts Neck, New Jersey. These activities included keeping and maintaining stallions, broodmares,…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Commissioner v. GroetzingerSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- First Chicago Corporation v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1988
- Portland Golf Club v. CommissionerSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
- Doyon, Ltd. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 1996
- Chugach Alaska Corporation Chugach Development Corp. Chugach Fisheries Inc. Chugach Forest Products Inc. Chugach Timber Corporation v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1994
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Strode v. Comm'rUnited States Tax Court · 2015
- Carl L. Gregory v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2023