Lawler v. Commissioner

17 B.T.A. 1083, 1929 BTA LEXIS 2192
CourtUnited States Board of Tax Appeals
DecidedOctober 25, 1929
DocketDocket No. 19395.
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 17 B.T.A. 1083 (Lawler v. Commissioner) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Board of Tax Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Lawler v. Commissioner, 17 B.T.A. 1083, 1929 BTA LEXIS 2192 (bta 1929).

Opinion

[1085]*1085OPINION.

Marquette:

The petitioner claims that the decedent Lawler sustained a loss of $80,000 in the year 1923 on the Swan Lake Plantation transaction, and that he is entitled to deduct that amount from his gross income for that year. The respondent takes the position that the $80,000 paid by Lawler on the plantation represented a gift made by him to Oberst and Scott, and, if it was not a gift, that Lawler did not enter into the transaction for profit.

It is clear that the transaction with respect to the Swan Lake Plantation was completed in the year 1923, and that Lawler was $80,000 poorer at the end of that year as the result of the transaction. The testimony of Oberst, Scott and Mrs. Lawler is that Lawler did not intend to make a gift to Oberst and Scott, that he had a large amount of money on deposit that he wished to invest, that he paid for the Swan Lake Plantation for Oberst and Scott, and that they agreed to assume the mortgages thereon and to repay Lawler the amount of $80,000, together with interest at 6 per cent. It is true that the payment of $80,000 ivas not recited in the deeds from Lawler to Oberst and Scott, and that the transaction between Oberst and Scott, on one hand, and Lawler, on the other, was not consummated with the care and attention to details that would ordinarily obtain in a transaction between individuals not bound together by family ties. However, we are satisfied from the evidence that Lawler did not make, or intend to make, a gift to Oberst and Scott; that he entered into the transaction with a view to profit, and that he sustained a loss of $80,000 thereon in the year 1923. The deduction should be allowed.

Judgment will he entered u/nder Rule 50,

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

Related

Lawler v. Commissioner
17 B.T.A. 1083 (Board of Tax Appeals, 1929)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
17 B.T.A. 1083, 1929 BTA LEXIS 2192, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lawler-v-commissioner-bta-1929.