Martin v. Commissioner

1975 T.C. Memo. 362, 34 T.C.M. 1564, 1975 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 14
CourtUnited States Tax Court
DecidedDecember 22, 1975
DocketDocket No. 10123-74.
StatusUnpublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 1975 T.C. Memo. 362 (Martin v. Commissioner) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Tax Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Martin v. Commissioner, 1975 T.C. Memo. 362, 34 T.C.M. 1564, 1975 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 14 (tax 1975).

Opinion

JAMES R. MARTIN and VENEDA R. MARTIN, Petitioners v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
Martin v. Commissioner
Docket No. 10123-74.
United States Tax Court
T.C. Memo 1975-362; 1975 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 14; 34 T.C.M. (CCH) 1564; T.C.M. (RIA) 750362;
December 22, 1975, Filed
James R. Martin, pro se.
Robert E. Touchton, for the respondent.

SCOTT

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION

SCOTT, Judge: Respondent determined a deficiency in petitioners' income tax for the calendar year 1972 in the amount of $103.95. The only issue for decision is whether the amounts of $267 and $200 paid to the Kentucky Country Day School and Chance Nursery and Kindergarten, Inc., respectively, are deductible by petitioners as medical expenses within the meaning of section 213, I.R.C. 1954. 1

FINDINGS OF FACT

*15 Some of the facts have been stipulated and are found accordingly.

Petitioners, husband and wife, who resided at Louisville, Kentucky at the time of the filing of their petition in this case, filed a joint Federal income tax return for the calendar year 1972 with the District Director of Internal Revenue, Louisville, Kentucky.

Petitioners kept their records and prepared their income tax return on the cash basis of accounting. James R. Martin (hereinafter referred to as petitioner) was a contractor during 1972 and his wife, Veneda R. Martin, was a housewife.

Petitioners had three children. Neither of their two older children attended a pre-school program or a private school. Their youngest son, Jimmy, was born with a severe hearing problem. He had an 85 "DB" hearing loss and is legally classified as deaf. Jimmy wears two hearing aids and because of these hearing aids and the early training he received at the Bill Wilkerson Center in self-discipline with respect to listening, he receives about half of spoken words and can interpret the meaning of conversations from hearing this portion of the words. He functions as a fairly normal person. Jimmy has never been taught formally to*16 lip-read but has picked it up for himself to some extent. He has been taught to listen.

Petitioners had taken Jimmy to the Bill Wilkerson Speech and Hearing Clinic in Nashville, Tennessee from the time he was six months old and were taking him there in early 1972. At the suggestion of persons at this clinic, petitioners placed Jimmy in the Chance Nursery and Kindergarten, Inc. prior to 1972 and he was continuing to attend this pre-school in the first part of 1972. The Chance Nursery and Kindergarten, Inc., which is located in Louisville, Kentucky, is not a school specifically for the handicapped and does not primarily function for the purpose of alleviating and treating the physically handicapped. The furnishing of general pre-school education is the primary objective of the school. The only medical care which is given to students at the school is emergency aid in case of illness or accident. One of the teachers at the Chance Nursery and Kindergarten, Inc. is a registered nurse. During the year 1972 the school did not furnish medical services or care to Jimmy or any other student other than as above indicated. Jimmy took the same basic curriculum as other students in his class but*17 because of his hearing handicap was given extra time by his teachers. In 1972 petitioners paid the Chance Nursery and Kindergarten, Inc. $200 as tuition for Jimmy. This was the same tuition charged the other students and was for Jimmy's basic pre-school education. No extra charges were made to petitioners because of Jimmy's hearing handicap. Jimmy received the same educational services in exchange for his tuition as did all other students at the nursery and kindergarten in exchange for theirs. In 1972 the Chance Nursery and Kindergarten, Inc. had an average of approximately one teacher to nine students with a ratio of one to six for two-year-olds; one to seven for three-year-olds; and one to ten for four-year-olds and kindergarten students. This teacher/pupil ratio is lower than is legally required so that the school can give each child who attends more individual attention. In practice the school accepts children with various types of specific problems who are otherwise normal, healthy, growing individuals. The school has accepted children with emotional disturbances, speech impediments and hearing losses. The philosophy of the school in accepting such students was in 1972 and has*18 been that a child with a problem has the same needs as other children, i.e. to play, to learn, to have real friends, to accept life as he will have to live it with or without a handicap. The school's philosophy is that a child with a handicap learns to deal with a handicap and overcomes it through being with "normal" people and that by accepting children with handicaps the normal child learns that people with problems are not different from others in their interests, needs and desires. The school does not maintain on its staff medical doctors or teachers who specialize in teaching only the deaf or handicapped student.

Jimmy's teacher kept in touch with his therapist and the therapist came to visit the teacher to instruct her on how to work with Jimmy. The objective in this association was to help Jimmy function better with normal children. However, the primary emphasis of the Chance Nursery and Kindergarten, Inc. is on education rather than alleviation or treatment of deafness.

Jimmy received no special tutoring at Chance school and there were no other deaf children in the class with Jimmy at the school.

Later in 1972, at the suggestion of the Kentucky Speech and Hearing Center*19 to which petitioners were taking Jimmy at that time in 1972, Jimmy was placed in the first grade in the Kentucky Country Day School. The Kentucky Country Day School is not a special school for physically handicapped individuals and provides no special treatment or training for such individuals.

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

Related

Barnes v. Commissioner
1978 T.C. Memo. 339 (U.S. Tax Court, 1978)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1975 T.C. Memo. 362, 34 T.C.M. 1564, 1975 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 14, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/martin-v-commissioner-tax-1975.