Commissioner V. Duberstein, 363 U.S. 278

In: Business and Management

Submitted By natebaggett
Words 530
Pages 3
Citation Commissioner v. Duberstein, 363 U.S. 278(1960)

Issue Is receiving an automobile from a business friend considered a gift or taxable compensation?

Facts Mr. Duberstein was president of the Duberstein Iron & Metal Company, and frequently did business with Mohawk Metal Corporation, whose president was Mr. Berman. They were friends and often talked on the phone about not only business deals, but also potential business clients. Mr. Duberstein gave Mr. Berman a list of potential clients for him to reach out to that his company was not interested in pursuing. That list ended up being helpful to Mohawk Metal and in return Mr. Berman decided to offer a Cadillac car to Mr. Duberstein, which he wrote off as a business expense. Even though Mr. Duberstein was hesitant to take it, he eventually did. The Tax court held that this transaction was not in fact a gift, but rather compensation for the services that he provided to Mr. Berman, therefore it was to be considered taxable income. The case was the taken to the court of appeals where Mr. Duberstein stated that he was never expecting the Cadillac making it a gift, and they saw it that was and revered the decision under mere suspicion that it was a gift. However, at the Supreme Court level they tested to transaction, and once again reversed the decision. They used four tests to decide that the transaction was deemed to be a business transaction, which made it taxable income, rather than simple a gift to Mr. Duberstein.

Holding The Cadillac received by Mr. Duberstein is to be seen as taxable income rather than a gift. The car was not a gift, but rather a recompense for services that he had performed in the past for Mr. Berman.

Analysis (1) Since the Cadillac was a payment in return for services rendered, it is irrelevant that the donor derives no economic benefit from it, as proven in Robertson…...

Similar Documents

California State Constitution V. U.S. Constitution

...California State Constitution v. U.S. Constitution HIS/301 William Liesman September 4, 2012 California State Constitution v. U.S. Constitution Monterey, California; the year was 1849 a group of Californians gathered at their first Constitutional convention to talk and construct a government to maintain law and order. In October 1849 a California State Constitution was adopted, outlining founding principles as a territory. Once California became a State in 1850 the newly adopted Constitution remained in place up to present day. ("Teachergenius", 2012). The California Constitution is similar in many ways to the United States Constitution. Example of this is; Article III California Constitution divided State Government into three branches: Legislative, Executive, and Judicial, the same as the U.S. Constitution. ("Teachergenius", 2012). There also are many differences between the two Constitutions. First; the California Constitution allows the Governor to line veto bills that have been submitted for approval, this means that the governor can accept some parts of the bill and delete other parts, and the President of the United States can only veto the entire bill. ("National Constitution Center", 2012). Second difference is; the Lieutenant Governor, which is equivalent to the U.S. Vice President, is elected by the voters separately from the State Governor, according to Article V (Executive Department). In the U.S.......

Words: 565 - Pages: 3

Davis V. the Board of County Commissioners of Dana Ana County

...Davis v. the Board of County Commissioners of Dana Ana County Patty Turner Dr. John Loblack HRM510 Business Employment Law 11/01/2012 Davis v. the Board of County Commissioners of Dana Ana County This case explores the fundamental legal issue of negligent referrals or misrepresentations of facts that an employer provides regarding a previous employee. Questions for the court to evaluate regarding the matter are: What if provided references are misleading? Can an employer be sued for exercising negligence in referring an unfit employee who harms or show foreseeable possibilities of causing harm on a new job? Who bestows the duty of care? What was the legal issue in this case? The legal issue in the case of Davis v the Board of County Commissioners of Doña Ana County involved the misrepresenting of referral information of a previous employee, Joseph Herrera. Herrera was a detention officer at the Dona Ana County Detention Center who was disciplined for having improper sexual interaction with female prison inmates. In spite of these unprofessional issues, Herrera’s supervisor, Frank Steele, gave him an outstanding reference; a reference that helped him secure another position at another institution. In addition to Steele’s excellent letter of reference, Herrera received a positive verbal recommendation from another supervisor, Mochen. Unfortunately, Herrera did not live up to the positive referrals he received......

Words: 995 - Pages: 4

David V. the Board of County Commissioners of Dona Ana County

...David v. The Board of County Commissioners of Dona Ana County HRM 510/Business Employment Law April 28, 2014 David v. The Board of County Commissioners of Dona Ana County In the case of David v. The Board of County Commissioners of Dona Ana County, the Mexico Supreme Court of Appeals held that when any employer chooses to provide an employment recommendation, the employer has a duty to not make negligent misrepresentation of current or past employee’s record when there is foreseeable potential risk of physical harm to the third party by the employee. In this case Joseph Herrera, an employee at the detention center was accused of sexually harassing the female inmates. Herrera’s supervisor at MVH where he was employed, advise Herrera that they will taking actions to discipline him due to the complaints and Herrera resigns. Herrera asks his employers to give him a letter of recommendation for an employer he was applying for and the supervisors give him an outstanding recommendation. His supervisors neglect to tell the prospective employer, that at the time of his employment, he was under investigation for sexual harassment. Because they did not disclose that information they employed Herrera and he repeated his actions. What was the legal issue in this case? There are two legal issues in question in the case of David v. The Board of County Commissioners of Dona Ana County. The issues in question are whether the employers feel the need to talk, and the employers......

Words: 956 - Pages: 4

David V. the Board of County Commissioners of Dona Ana County

...David v. The Board of County Commissioners of Dona Ana County April 28, 2014 David v. The Board of County Commissioners of Dona Ana County In the case of David v. The Board of County Commissioners of Dona Ana County, the Mexico Supreme Court of Appeals held that when any employer chooses to provide an employment recommendation, the employer has a duty to not make negligent misrepresentation of current or past employee’s record when there is foreseeable potential risk of physical harm to the third party by the employee. In this case Joseph Herrera, an employee at the detention center was accused of sexually harassing the female inmates. Herrera’s supervisor at MVH where he was employed, advise Herrera that they will taking actions to discipline him due to the complaints and Herrera resigns. Herrera asks his employers to give him a letter of recommendation for an employer he was applying for and the supervisors give him an outstanding recommendation. His supervisors neglect to tell the prospective employer, that at the time of his employment, he was under investigation for sexual harassment. Because they did not disclose that information they employed Herrera and he repeated his actions. What was the legal issue in this case? There are two legal issues in question in the case of David v. The Board of County Commissioners of Dona Ana County. The issues in question are whether the employers feel the need to talk, and the employers choosing to recommend employees owe......

Words: 951 - Pages: 4

Ellis V. Commissioner Social Security Administration

...Ellis v. Commissioner Social Security Administration Doc. 19 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON PORTLAND DIVISION DANIEL GENE ELLIS, Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner, Social Security Administration, Defendant. OPINION & ORDER No. CV-10-6253-HZ Kathryn Tassinari Harder, Wells, Baron & Manning, P.C. 474 Willamette, Suite 200 Eugene, Oregon 97401 Attorney for Plaintiff /// /// /// /// /// /// 1 - OPINION & ORDER Dockets.Justia.com Amanda Marshall UNITED STATES ATTORNEY District of Oregon Adrian L. Brown ASSISTANT UNITED STATES ATTORNEY 1000 S.W. Third Avenue, Suite 600 Portland, Oregon 97204-2902 Kathy Reif SPECIAL ASSISTANT UNITED STATES ATTORNEY Office of the General Counsel Social Security Administration 701 5th Avenue, Suite 2900 Seattle, Washington 98104-7075 Attorneys for Defendant HERNANDEZ, District Judge: Plaintiff Daniel Ellis (“Ellis”) brings this action for judicial review of the Commissioner’s final decision denying his application for Disability Insurance Benefits (“DIB”) under Title II of the Social Security Act. I have jurisdiction under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) (incorporated by 42 U.S.C. § 1382(c)(3)). For the following reasons, I REVERSE and REMAND the Commissioner’s decision for further proceedings. BACKGROUND Born in 1961 (Tr. 96), Ellis has a general equivalency degree (Tr. 136) and reports past work as a logger, heavy equipment repair person, and welder. Tr. 130. Ellis initially alleged disability since......

Words: 5555 - Pages: 23

Davis V. the Board of County Commissioners of Doña Ana County

...Davis v. The Board of County Commissioners of Doña Ana County  January 23, 2011 1. What was the legal issue in this case? The legal issue in the case of Davis v. The Board of County Commissioners of Doña Ana County involved acts of ill-will which could have been avoided. While employed as a detention officer at the Dona Ana County Detention Center, Joseph Herrera, was accused of unsuitable sexual behavior with female prison inmates and of exchanging favors for sex acts. Herrera’s supervisor, Frank Steele, investigated the charges and advised Herrera that he would be reprimanded. Herrera resigned to avoid disciplinary action. Six days later, Steele wrote a recommendation letter on Herrera’s behalf that portrayed him as an “excellent employee” and told prospective employers: “I am confident that you would find [Herrera] to be an excellent employee.” (Walsh, 2010, p.149). Also, constructive verbal references were made by another Detention Center supervisor. Plaintiff sued the County for negligent misrepresentation alleging that the misinformation provided by the Detention Center employees, Steele and Mochen, actually caused Herrera to be hired at MVH and Plaintiff to be assaulted. 2. Why does the court conclude that Doña Ana County could be held liable for negligent referral (misrepresentation)? The court concludes that Doña Ana County could be held liable for negligent referral (misrepresentation) because of the positive references. Herrera acquired a......

Words: 808 - Pages: 4

Financial Reporting: the U.S. V Europe

...where an international standard referred to an existing U.S. standard as a foundation, the IASB could stand and take a clean approach to that standard. In so doing, the IASB avoided some of the recognized problems with the FASB standard (Ernst & Young, 2007). During the 2012 British Studies Program’s trip to Europe this summer, students had the opportunity to visit with many different businesses. Many aspects of the businesses were examined, including management, marketing, finance, and accounting. As discovered during the visits, many differences exist in the way business is conducted in Europe - both culturally and economically – as compared to other countries. A common subject amongst all the businesses attended was the subject of whether the United States will adopt the International Financial Reporting Standards, also known as IFRS, or continue to use the Generally Accepted Accounting Practices, also known as GAAP. Some companies believe it is just a matter of time before the migration between standards takes place, while others do not believe the United States will ever adopt IFRS. In either scenario, many pros and cons exist. Many of the differences between the U.S. GAAP and IFRS are regarded as being cosmetic, referring to the location of the information, or substantive, referring to the differences in the way things are valued. As mentioned, someone wanting to compare financial information for a U.S. based company and a company based in Europe would......

Words: 3687 - Pages: 15

Gideon V. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335 (1963

... Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335 (1963) Facts: Gideon was charged with breaking and entering with the intent to commit a misdemeanor, which is a felony under Florida law. At trial, Gideon appeared in court without an attorney. In open court, he asked the judge to appoint counsel for him because he could not afford an attorney. The trial judge denied Gideon’s request because Florida law only permitted appointment of counsel for poor defendants charged with capital offenses. At trial, Gideon represented himself – he made an opening statement to the jury, cross-examined the prosecution’s witnesses, presented witnesses in his own defense, declined to testify himself, and made arguments emphasizing his innocence. Despite his efforts, the jury found Gideon guilty and he was sentenced to five years imprisonment. Gideon sought relief from his conviction by filing a petition for writ of habeas corpus in the Florida Supreme Court. In his petition, Gideon challenged his conviction and sentence on the ground that the trial judge’s refusal to appoint counsel violated Gideon’s constitutional rights. The Florida Supreme Court denied Gideon’s petition. Gideon next filed a handwritten petition in the Supreme Court of the United States. The Court agreed to hear the case to resolve the question of whether the right to counsel guaranteed under the Sixth Amendment of the Constitution applies to defendants in state court. Issue: A prior decision of the Court’s, Betts v. Brady,......

Words: 484 - Pages: 2

Duberstein vs. Commissioner

...The property you have received from your customer is fully taxable and should be included in your tax return. I have done some research on the matter and have found a case that has similar facts to your situation. In Commissioner v. Duberstein, two individuals, who were both presidents of their respective companies, talked regularly to transact their businesses with each other. Bernan, the president of Mohawk, asked Duberstein, the president of Duberstein Iron and Metal Company, if he knew of potential customers for Mohawk. Duberstein said yes and provided Bernan with the names of potential customers. One day, Bernan phoned Duberstein and said that the information he gave was helpful and that he wanted to give Duberstein a president. Duberstein ended up accepting the present, which was a Cadillac. Mohawk deducted the value of the Cadillac as a business expense and Dubersten did not include the value of the Cadillac in gross income for 1951, deeming it as a gift. The Supreme Court used different tests in order to help classify this transaction as a gift or a non-gift exchange. One test provided that, “if the payment proceeds primarily from the ‘constraining force of any moral or legal duty,’ or from the ‘incentive of anticipated benefit’ of an economic nature, it is not a gift. And, conversely, ‘where the payment is in return for services rendered, it is irrelevant that the donor derives no economic benefit from it.’” This outlines one true definition of an exchange of......

Words: 417 - Pages: 2

Davis V. the Board of County Commissioners of Doña Ana County 1

...Davis v. The Board of County Commissioners of Doña Ana County Wanda Pennywell Professor Jama Rand HRM 510 July 16, 2011 Abstract In this paper I will discuss the case of Davis v. the Board of County Commissioners of Doña Ana County. In this case Joseph Herrera an employee at the detention center was accused of sexually harassing the female inmates. Herrera’s supervisor at MVH where he was employed, advise Herrera that they will taking actions to discipline him due to the complaints and Herrera resigns. Herrera asks his employers to give him a letter of recommendation for an employer he was applying for and the supervisors give him an outstanding recommendation. His supervisors neglect to tell the prospective employer that at the time of his employment he was under investigation for sexual harassment. Because they did not disclose that information they employed Herrera and he repeated his actions. 1. What was the legal issue in this case? The legal issue in this case is whether or not the Doña Ana County Detention Center was responsible for the actions of Joseph Herrera. While working for the Doña Ana County Detention Center, Herrera was under investigation for sexually harassing various females in the detention center. The sexual harassment claims involved sexual statements and comments, requesting to have sexual relations with the inmates and in some cases receiving sex from the inmates in return for assisting them with various different things. The...

Words: 1106 - Pages: 5

Davis V. the Board of County Commissioners of Doña Ana County

...What was the legal issue in this case? The legal issue in the case of Davis v. The Board of County Commissioners of Doña Ana County involves whether a person making a recommendation to a prospective employer of another is bound by the actions of the said employee. The case involves a positive, but inaccurate, recommendation of Joseph “Tinie” Herrera as an employee of high character and standards. Herrera had previously been employed at the Dona Ana County Detention Center where his conduct had been under question. He had been under investigation for using his authority as detention sergeant and classification officer to sexually harass female inmates at the detention center. Herrera was accused, in a report authored by Steele, of using his authority over the girls to get sex in exchange for personal favors for them. As Herrera’s immediate supervisor, part of Steele’s job included recommending discipline. His choice would include suspension without pay, demotion in rank, and a possible reassignment away from his accusers. Herrera was informed by Steele on April 5, 1994 that on April 12 he would make these recommendations. Herra resigned before the recommended punishment could take place. However, six days after the resignation, Steele wrote a very impressive, but inaccurate, recommendation to a perspective employer of Herrea. In the letter, he stated how Herrera implemented social programs for the inmates with “imagination and imagination.” (Walsh, 2010) He went...

Words: 630 - Pages: 3

Gm520 Burlington Industries, Inc V Ellerth 524 U.S. 742 (1998)

...CASE BRIEF  Style of Case and Citation: Burlington Industries, Inc v Ellerth 524 U.S. 742 (1998)  Court Rendering Final Decision: U.S. Supreme Court  Identification of Parties and Procedural Details: Kimberly Ellerth (plaintiff) sued Burlington Industries, Inc (defendant) stating that sexual harassment was the cause of her forced discharge. The District Court determined that Mr. Slowik’s behavior created a hostile environment. The courts also found that Burlington Industries did not know and isn’t expected to know about the hostile working environment Mr. Slowik had created. Burlington appealed.  Discussion of the Facts: Who did what to whom? What relief is being sought? Kimberly Ellerth had been constantly sexually harassed by her supervisor Mr. Slowik. Mr. Slowik had the authority to hire, promote or terminate employment. Mr. Slowik made boorish and very offensive remarks to Kimberly. Kimberly filed suit against Burlington for violating Title VII being that sexual harassment lead to her forced resignation.  Statement and Discussion of the Legal Issues in Dispute: What decision of the lower court is being challenged? What specific legal questions is the subject court being asked to address? Is the question about Common-Law? A Statute? Burlington is challenging the court’s decision that their employee Mr. Slowik had in fact created a hostile work environment even though they acknowledged that Burlington didn’t know or was......

Words: 536 - Pages: 3

Hazelwood School District V. Kuhlmeier, 484 U.S. 260 (1988)

...LEGAL BRIEF Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier, 484 U.S. 260 (1988) 5-3; Justice White for the majority FACTS: Three former Hazelwood East high school students who were staff members of Spectrum, the school newspaper are suing Robert Reynolds, the principal of Hazelwood High School and Howard Emerson, their Journalism II teacher. The students believed that their school officials violated their First Amendment rights by removing two pages of articles from their upcoming new issue of Spectrum. The reasons for removing the articles based on Reynolds analysis, was because in the first article about pregnancy, it information was so descriptive that any of the students or faculty could identify the pregnant students from the text without giving out their identities. In the second article that was removed, a student argued about the impact of divorce on students at the school in her own opinions, but didn’t have consent from the parents to the publication of the article. The District Court found that no First Amendment violations had occurred. The District Court also determined that school officials could impose restraints on students' speech in the school sponsored newspaper. Even though the students believed what Reynolds did was wrong, he did have reasonable evidence to do what was right for the high school. Although the District Court made a decision, The Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit had a different opinion. The court found out the schools newspaper is......

Words: 405 - Pages: 2

Davis V. the Board of County Commissioner of Doña Ana County

...Assignment #1 – Davis v. The Board of County Commissioner of Doña Ana County Lisa Auvil January 22, 2012 Business Employment Law - HRM 510 Dr. Zelphia A. Brown, SPHR, Instructor Assignment #1 – Davis v. The Board of County Commissioner of Doña Ana County 1. What is the legal issue in this case? The legal issue in this case is negligent referral (Walsh p 148). Negligent referral is when a former employer gives a positive recommendation that leads to half-truths with regards to the character of a former employee. Liability may be imposed if the referral leads to foreseeable and considerable risk or harm to a third party (McCord 1999). Mesilla Valley Hospital (MVH), a psychiatric hospital in Doña Ana County hired Joseph Herrera (Herrera) as a mental health technician on January 20, 1995. Prior to his employment with MVH Herrera was a detention sergeant and classification officer at Doña Ana County Detention Center (Detention Center). According to the plaintiff Herrera was hired by MVH based on the unqualified favorable recommendations from his former Detention Center Supervisors Frank Steele and Al Mochen. The accuracy of these recommendations is the crux of the Plaintiff’s suit against the County ("Davis v. the," 1999). 2. Why does the court conclude that Doña Ana County could be held liable for negligent referral (misrepresentation)? While employed at the Detention Center in 1993 a female inmate alleged that Herrera had sexually harassed......

Words: 792 - Pages: 4

Hazen Paper Co. V. Biggins 507 U.S. 604 (1993)

...Hazen Paper Co. v. Biggins 507 U.S. 604 (1993) Case Study JSale. GB41- Employment Law Professor Shawn Pattinson 1 Do you agree with the court that age and years of service are sufficiently distinct to allow for terminations based on years of service and to find no violation of the ADEA where the terminations result in a greater proportion of older workers being fired? The Age Discrimination in Employment Act (the ADEA) forbids discrimination based on age by protecting individuals over the age of forty from “arbitrary” age discrimination. Congress passed the Age Discrimination in Employment Act to “promote employment of older persons based on their ability rather than age (29. U.S.C. 621b. 1990). In Hazen Paper Co. v. Biggins, the Supreme Court of the United States resolved a split in the circuit courts of appeals and held that an employer does not violate the Act when the employer makes a decision wholly motivated by factors other than age. In Hazen Paper, the employer terminated an employee to prevent the employee from vesting in his pension. Under the employer’s plan, the pension vested based upon the employee’s years of service and was not directly related to age. The Supreme Court rejected the plaintiff’s argument, holding that “age and years of service are analytically distinct” and that it is “incorrect to say that a decision based on years of service is necessarily ‘age-based (Hazen Paper Co. v. Biggins. 507 U.S. 604 (1993). The Supreme Court......

Words: 1403 - Pages: 6