Crouser v. Commissioner
United States Tax Court
Petitioner C made payments during 1975 to his former wife, B, under the terms of a divorce decree. The decree awarded certain property to B and ordered C to pay $ 125 per week to insure that the debts on that property were paid. These payments were to continue "until the accounts are paid in full, or until further order."
Read the full summary
Petitioner C made payments during 1975 to his former wife, B, under the terms of a divorce decree. The decree awarded certain property to B and ordered C to pay $ 125 per week to insure that the debts on that property were paid. These payments were to continue "until the accounts are paid in full, or until further order." Held: The payments are in satisfaction of a principal sum under sec. 71(c)(1), I.R.C. 1954, and not periodic payments under sec. 71(a). No deduction is allowable for the payments under sec. 215. Kent v. Commissioner, 61 T.C. 133 (1973). Held, further, the payments are not…
1Opinion of the Court
Clyde J. Crouser and Dorothy J. Crouser, Petitioners v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Respondent
Crouser v. Commissioner
Docket No. 418-78
United States Tax Court
73 T.C. 1113; 1980 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 166;
March 18, 1980, Filed
Decision will be entered for the respondent.
Petitioner C made payments during 1975 to his former wife, B, under the terms of a divorce decree. The decree awarded certain property to B and ordered C to pay $ 125 per week to insure that the debts on that property were paid. These payments were to continue "until the accounts are paid in full, or until further order." Held:…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Wolfe v. WolfeOhio Supreme Court · 1976
- Jackson v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1970
- Baltimore & Ohio Rd. Co. v. BaillieOhio Supreme Court · 1925
- Michael N. Lambros v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1972
- Kent v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1973
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.