Coleman v. Commissioner
United States Tax Court
Ps claimed a casualty loss for the loss of an elm tree from Dutch elm disease. Held, loss caused by a disease does not constitute a casualty loss under sec. 165(c)(3), I.R.C. 1954. Burns v. United States, 174 F. Supp. 203 (N.D. Ohio 1959), affd. per curiam 284 F.2d 436 (6th Cir. 1960), followed.
1Opinion of the Court
Parker, Judge:
Respondent determined a deficiency in petitioners' 1977 Federal income tax in the amount of $1,592.25. Concessions having been made, the only issues remaining are whether or not petitioners are entitled to a casualty loss deduction under section 165(c)(3)1 for the loss of an elm tree infected with Dutch elm disease, and if so, the amount of that loss.
FINDINGS OF FACT
Some of the facts have been stipulated and are found accordingly.
Petitioners, husband and wife, filed a joint Federal income tax return for the calendar year 1977 with the Internal Revenue Service in Cincinnati,…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Jack E. Golsen and Sylvia H. Golsen v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1971
- Fay v. HelveringCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1941
- White v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1967
- Rosenberg v. Commisssioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1952
- Maher v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1981
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Maher v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1981
- Sealy Corp. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1996
- Agro-Jal Farming Enters. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 2015
- Godwin v. Comm'rUnited States Tax Court · 2003
- Marc L. Mancini v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 2019
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.