Frank G. Templeton and Helen M. Templeton v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

Fourth Circuit

Frank G. Templeton and Helen M. Templeton v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

573 F.2d 866, 41 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 1186, 1978 U.S. App. LEXIS 11605

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided April 18, 1978·No. 77-1440·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

The Tax Court held that taxpayers had failed to prove that they were entitled to non-recognition of capital gains as provided by § 1033(a)(3)(A) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 when they expended the proceeds of a condemnation award to purchase control of a corporation which they had organized and to which they had conveyed some real property owned by them and members of their family before the condemnation award was made. Frank G. and Helen M. Templeton, 66 T.C. 51 (1976).

The issue of whether the purchase of control was of a corporation “owning . property similar or related in service or use to the property so [condemned] . for the purpose of replacing the property so [condemned]” was largely factual. From our review of the record and consideration of the arguments, both written and oral, we conclude that the Tax Court correctly found the facts, applied the correct legal standards and reached the correct conclusion. We affirm on its opinion.

AFFIRMED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM:

The Tax Court held that taxpayers had failed to prove that they were entitled to non-recognition of capital gains as provided by § 1033(a)(3)(A) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 when they expended the proceeds of a condemnation award to purchase control of a corporation which they had organized and to which they had conveyed some real property owned by them and members of their family before the condemnation award was made. Frank G. and Helen M. Templeton, 66 T.C. 51 (1976).

The issue of whether the purchase of control was of a corporation “owning . property similar or related in service or use to the property so [condemned] . for the purpose of replacing the property so [condemned]” was largely factual. From our review of the record and consideration of the arguments, both written and oral, we conclude that the Tax Court correctly found the facts, applied the correct legal standards and reached the correct conclusion. We affirm on its opinion.

AFFIRMED.

Frank G. Templeton and Helen M. Templeton v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 573 F.2d 866, 41 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 1186, 1978 U.S. App. LEXIS 11605 (4th Cir. 1978).

Pincite

573 F.2d 866 (Frank G. Templeton and Helen M. Templeton v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related