Legal Opinion · Dissent

Patterson v. Laney

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama

Decided January 4, 1989No. Civ. 6579Published

1DissentIngram, Judge

I respectfully dissent from the majority opinion regarding the trial court’s interpretation of the phrase “net income after taxes.” There are, in my opinion, few phrases whose definitions are more widely understood or more likely to lend themselves to but one interpretation. Alabama law defines net income as follows:

“In the case of an individual, the term ‘net income’ means the gross income as defined by section 40-18-14, less the deductions allowed by section 40-18-15.”

§ 40-18-12, Ala.Code 1975 (1985 Repl.Vol.).

Net income for federal income tax purposes is similarly defined as follows:

“…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Helvering v. F. & R. Lazarus & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1939
  2. McDonald v. CommissionerSupreme Court of the United States · 1944
  3. Terry Cove North, Inc. v. BALDWIN CTY. SEWER AUTH.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1985
  4. Estate of Walling v. CommissionerCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1967
  5. Trimble v. ToddSupreme Court of Alabama · 1987

1 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