Legal Opinion

Grant v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Decided December 30, 1953No. 42, Docket 22692PublishedCited by 30 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

FRANK, Circuit Judge.

I. As the taxpayer wisely conceded on oral argument in this court, the 1929 agreement, made some 35 days before the divorce suit began, was “incident to” the divorce.1

2. If, without more, Ross, in May 1946, had paid Jane Grant the $10,-720 of arrears due under the 1929 agreement, it would have been indisputable that that sum constituted “periodic payments,” taxable to her under the statute, notwithstanding they were paid in a lump. For delay in making several periodic payments does not change their original character.2 We think the same *433is true here, since the 1946…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Gregory v. HelveringSupreme Court of the United States · 1935
  2. Commissioner v. SunnenSupreme Court of the United States · 1948
  3. Helvering v. CliffordSupreme Court of the United States · 1940
  4. Lucas v. EarlSupreme Court of the United States · 1930
  5. Helvering v. HallockSupreme Court of the United States · 1940

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by30 opinions

  1. Walsh v. Comm'rUnited States Tax Court · 1954
  2. Newton v. PedrickCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1954
  3. Borax v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1963
  4. Antoinette L. Holahan v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1955
  5. Kitch v. CommissionerCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1996

25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API