Healey v. Commissioner
United States Tax Court
Held, on the facts presented, that payments made by petitioner subsequent to the issuance of a restraining order requiring him to live separate and apart from his wife and children and prior to the issuance of a temporary support order specifically directing the petitioner to pay his wife a specified amount for her support and that of their children, do not constitute payments of an obligation imposed or incurred "under a decree of divorce or separate maintenance" as…
Read the full summary
Held, on the facts presented, that payments made by petitioner subsequent to the issuance of a restraining order requiring him to live separate and apart from his wife and children and prior to the issuance of a temporary support order specifically directing the petitioner to pay his wife a specified amount for her support and that of their children, do not constitute payments of an obligation imposed or incurred "under a decree of divorce or separate maintenance" as provided by sec. 71, I.R.C. 1954, and therefore are not deductible as alimony under sec. 215, I.R.C. 1954.
1Opinion of the Court
John S. Healey, Petitioner v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Respondent
Healey v. Commissioner
Docket No. 473-69SC
United States Tax Court
54 T.C. 1702; 1970 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 68;
September 1, 1970, Filed
Decision will be entered for the respondent.
Held, on the facts presented, that payments made by petitioner subsequent to the issuance of a restraining order requiring him to live separate and apart from his wife and children and prior to the issuance of a temporary support order specifically directing the petitioner to pay his wife a specified amount for her support and that of their children,…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Daine v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1948
- Daine v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1947
- Read v. ReadSupreme Court of Colorado · 1949
- Healey v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1970