Martin J. Welsh and Elsie N. Welsh v. United States

Sixth Circuit

Martin J. Welsh and Elsie N. Welsh v. United States

329 F.2d 145, 13 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 935, 1964 U.S. App. LEXIS 6023

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

DecidedMarch 17, 1964

Docket15379_1

StatusPublished

Cited by30 cases

This text of 329 F.2d 145 (Martin J. Welsh and Elsie N. Welsh v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Martin J. Welsh and Elsie N. Welsh v. United States, 329 F.2d 145, 13 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 935, 1964 U.S. App. LEXIS 6023 (6th Cir. 1964).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This case, like Condit et al. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 329 F.2d 153 (C.A.6), involved the question as to the deductibility of expenditures incurred by taxpayer for tuition and books in attending night law school. Taxpayer had been employed by the Internal Revenue Service in the Intelligence Division. He graduated from the law school and was admitted to the bar in Ohio. Shortly thereafter he terminated his employment with the Internal Revenue Service to engage in the general practice of law.

The action in the District Court was to recover a refund of income taxes paid by the taxpayer on the ground that they were illegally assessed and collected. Trial by jury was waived and the District Judge heard the evidence.

The District Judge, in a memorandum opinion, analyzed the evidence and drew inferences therefrom. He found that taxpayer’s enrollment in law school was primarily to maintain or improve the skills required of him in his employment with the Internal Revenue Service and that the expenses he incurred were properly deductible as an ordinary or necessary business expense under Section 162 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954. (26 U.S.C. § 162) Treasury Regulations on Income (1954 Code) Section 1.162-5.

The issue in this case was solely one of fact. In our opinion, there was substantial evidence to support the findings of fact of the District Judge. While he reached a different conclusion than the Tax Court in the Condit case, we cannot say that his findings of fact based on the evidence in the present case are clearly erroneous.

The judgment of the District Court is affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

This case, like Condit et al. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 329 F.2d 153 (C.A.6), involved the question as to the deductibility of expenditures incurred by taxpayer for tuition and books in attending night law school. Taxpayer had been employed by the Internal Revenue Service in the Intelligence Division. He graduated from the law school and was admitted to the bar in Ohio. Shortly thereafter he terminated his employment with the Internal Revenue Service to engage in the general practice of law.

The action in the District Court was to recover a refund of income taxes paid by the taxpayer on the ground that they were illegally assessed and collected. Trial by jury was waived and the District Judge heard the evidence.

The District Judge, in a memorandum opinion, analyzed the evidence and drew inferences therefrom. He found that taxpayer’s enrollment in law school was primarily to maintain or improve the skills required of him in his employment with the Internal Revenue Service and that the expenses he incurred were properly deductible as an ordinary or necessary business expense under Section 162 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954. (26 U.S.C. § 162) Treasury Regulations on Income (1954 Code) Section 1.162-5.

The issue in this case was solely one of fact. In our opinion, there was substantial evidence to support the findings of fact of the District Judge. While he reached a different conclusion than the Tax Court in the Condit case, we cannot say that his findings of fact based on the evidence in the present case are clearly erroneous.

The judgment of the District Court is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

329 F.2d 145, 13 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 935, 1964 U.S. App. LEXIS 6023, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/martin-j-welsh-and-elsie-n-welsh-v-united-states-ca6-1964.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack