Hawkins, Delafield & Wood v. Michael

New York Court of Appeals

Hawkins, Delafield & Wood v. Michael

492 N.E.2d 1216, 67 N.Y.2d 873, 501 N.Y.S.2d 800, 1986 N.Y. LEXIS 17663

CourtNew York Court of Appeals

DecidedMarch 20, 1986

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 492 N.E.2d 1216 (Hawkins, Delafield & Wood v. Michael) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Hawkins, Delafield & Wood v. Michael, 492 N.E.2d 1216, 67 N.Y.2d 873, 501 N.Y.S.2d 800, 1986 N.Y. LEXIS 17663 (N.Y. 1986).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The judgment of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.

[875]*875A determination of the Commissioner of Finance should be upheld unless shown to be erroneous, arbitrary or capricious (see, Matter of Holy Spirit Assn. v Tax Commn., 55 NY2d 512, 518; Matter of Koner v Procaccino, 39 NY2d 258, 264-265). Here, the Commissioner denied the deductions claimed by petitioners on the ground that section S46-6.0 (3) of the New York City unincorporated business tax (Administrative Code of City of New York § S46-6.0 [3]) disallows deductions for "amounts paid or incurred to a proprietor or partner for services or for use of capital”. In view of the finding that the retirement payments in question constituted deferred compensation for services performed by the payees or for use of their capital while they were actively engaged in the conduct of the partnership business, and inasmuch as section S46-6.0 (3) contains no language limiting its scope to payments actually made while the payees were still active partners, the Commissioner’s determination was the correct interpretation and application of the statutory provision and, therefore, properly confirmed (see, Matter of Grace v New York State Tax Commn., 37 NY2d 193, 195-197).

Chief Judge Wachtler and Judges Meyer, Simons, Alexander, Titone and Hancock, Jr., concur; Judge Kaye taking no part.

Judgment affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.

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

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The judgment of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.

[875]*875A determination of the Commissioner of Finance should be upheld unless shown to be erroneous, arbitrary or capricious (see, Matter of Holy Spirit Assn. v Tax Commn., 55 NY2d 512, 518; Matter of Koner v Procaccino, 39 NY2d 258, 264-265). Here, the Commissioner denied the deductions claimed by petitioners on the ground that section S46-6.0 (3) of the New York City unincorporated business tax (Administrative Code of City of New York § S46-6.0 [3]) disallows deductions for "amounts paid or incurred to a proprietor or partner for services or for use of capital”. In view of the finding that the retirement payments in question constituted deferred compensation for services performed by the payees or for use of their capital while they were actively engaged in the conduct of the partnership business, and inasmuch as section S46-6.0 (3) contains no language limiting its scope to payments actually made while the payees were still active partners, the Commissioner’s determination was the correct interpretation and application of the statutory provision and, therefore, properly confirmed (see, Matter of Grace v New York State Tax Commn., 37 NY2d 193, 195-197).

Chief Judge Wachtler and Judges Meyer, Simons, Alexander, Titone and Hancock, Jr., concur; Judge Kaye taking no part.

Judgment affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

492 N.E.2d 1216, 67 N.Y.2d 873, 501 N.Y.S.2d 800, 1986 N.Y. LEXIS 17663, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hawkins-delafield-wood-v-michael-ny-1986.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack