Rudiger v. Commissioner

Board of Tax Appeals

Rudiger v. Commissioner

22 B.T.A. 204

CourtUnited States Board of Tax Appeals

DecidedFebruary 18, 1931

DocketDocket No. 41706

StatusPublished

This text of 22 B.T.A. 204 (Rudiger 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

Rudiger v. Commissioner, 22 B.T.A. 204 (bta 1931).

Pincite

Opinion

[206]*206OPINION.

Arundell :

The only point in controversy under the first issue is whether or not the loss was sustained in 1925 or prior thereto. In 1924 the corporation was dissolved without sufficient assets to pay any part of the indebtedness. Thereafter petitioner had only the endorsers to look to for payment, and by the close of 1924 he knew that they were financially unable to pay any part of their liability to him. A bare hope that something might turn up in the future that would permit petitioner to recover constitutes no sound reason for postponing the time for taking a deduction for a loss that has been clearly sustained. The record satisfies us that the loss was sustained prior to the year 1925.

The respondent’s action in denying petitioner a personal exemption of $3,500 as the head of a family was not error. Hannah D. Stratton, 5 B. T. A. 1025; W. E. Massey, 14 B. T. A. 407; Louise Kingsley, 11 B. T. A. 296.

Decision will be entered for the respondent.

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

[206]*206OPINION.

Arundell :

The only point in controversy under the first issue is whether or not the loss was sustained in 1925 or prior thereto. In 1924 the corporation was dissolved without sufficient assets to pay any part of the indebtedness. Thereafter petitioner had only the endorsers to look to for payment, and by the close of 1924 he knew that they were financially unable to pay any part of their liability to him. A bare hope that something might turn up in the future that would permit petitioner to recover constitutes no sound reason for postponing the time for taking a deduction for a loss that has been clearly sustained. The record satisfies us that the loss was sustained prior to the year 1925.

The respondent’s action in denying petitioner a personal exemption of $3,500 as the head of a family was not error. Hannah D. Stratton, 5 B. T. A. 1025; W. E. Massey, 14 B. T. A. 407; Louise Kingsley, 11 B. T. A. 296.

Decision will be entered for the respondent.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

22 B.T.A. 204, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rudiger-v-commissioner-bta-1931.