Comm'r of Internal Revenue v. Richard H. Turner & Emily D. Turner, Comm'r of Internal Revenue v. Richard H. Turner & James F. McClelland Jr., Special Administrators of the Est. of Pamela T. Turner, Deceased, 410 F.2d 752 (6th Cir. 1969). · Go Syfert
Search
Comm'r of Internal Revenue v. Richard H. Turner & Emily D. Turner, Comm'r of Internal Revenue v. Richard H. Turner & James F. McClelland Jr., Special Administrators of the Est. of Pamela T. Turner, Deceased, 410 F.2d 752 (6th Cir. 1969). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
84 citation events (7 in the last 25 years) across 12 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Edna Bennett Hirst v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue (ca4, 1978-01-04)
Treatment trajectory · 1969 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1969 1997 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 6 distinct citers. How cited ↗
cited Cited as authority (rule) Edna Bennett Hirst v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
4th Cir. · 1978 · confidence medium
On appeal to the Sixth Circuit, the Commissioner again conceded that the amounts paid by the trustees to the donor were not taxable to her. 410 F.2d at 753.
cited Cited "see, e.g." Joe C. Davis, Estate of Rascoe B. Davis, Third National Bank, and Delta C. Davis, Cross v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, (81-1127), Cross (81-1187). Joe C. Davis, Cross v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, (81-1126), Cross (81-1187)
3rd Cir. · 1984 · signal: see also · confidence low
See also Turner v. Commissioner, 49 T.C. 356 (1968), aff'd, 410 F.2d 752 (6th Cir.1969).
cited Cited "see, e.g." Davis v. Commissioner
6th Cir. · 1984 · signal: see also · confidence low
See also Turner v. Commissioner, 49 T.C. 356 (1968), aff’d, 410 F.2d 752 (6th Cir.1969).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Teofilo Evangelista and Frances Evangelista v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
7th Cir. · 1980 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e. g., Turner v. Commissioner, 49 T.C. 356 (1968), aff’d, 410 F.2d 752 (6th Cir. 1969) (per curiam); Hirst v. Commissioner, 572 F.2d 427 (4th Cir. 1978) (in banc), affirming, 63 T.C. 307 (1974); Estate of Henry v. Commissioner, 69 T.C. 665 (1978), on appeal to the Sixth Circuit, No. 78-1340 (argued July 16, 1980). 12 An examination of these cases is useful.
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Estate of Levine v. Commissioner (2×)
Tax Ct. · 1979 · signal: compare · confidence low
Compare Turner v. Commissioner , 49 T.C. 356 (1968) , affd. per curiam 410 F.2d 752 (6th Cir. 1969) (net gift), with Johnson v. Commissioner, supra ↩ (part gift, part sale). 8.
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Malone v. United States
N.D. Miss. · 1971 · signal: see also · confidence medium
See also Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Turner, 410 F.2d 752, 753 (6 Cir. 1969), and Herff v. Rountree, 140 F.Supp. 201 (M.D.Tenn.1956), appeal dismissed 249 F.2d 958 (6 Cir. 1957). 18 . (a) Gifts after December 31, 1920. — If the property was acquired by gift after December 31, 1920, the basis shall be the same as it would be in the hands of the donor. 19 . (b) Transfers in trust after December 31, 1920. — If the property was acquired after December 31, 1920, by a transfer in trust (other than by a gift, bequest, or devise), the basis shall be the same as it would be in the hands of …
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Commissioner of Internal Revenue
v.
Richard H. Turner and Emily D. Turner, Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Richard H. Turner and James F. McClelland Jr., Special Administrators of the Estate of Pamela T. Turner, Deceased
19011_1.
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit.
Jun 12, 1969.
410 F.2d 752
Cited by 5 opinions  |  Published

410 F.2d 752

COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Petitioner,
v.
Richard H. TURNER and Emily D. Turner, Respondents.
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Petitioner,
v.
Richard H. TURNER and James F. McClelland, Jr., Special Administrators of the Estate of Pamela T. Turner, Deceased, Respondents.

No. 19010.

No. 19011.

United States Court of Appeals Sixth Circuit.

May 15, 1969.

As Corrected June 12, 1969.

Stanley L. Ruby, Atty., Dept. of Justice, Washington, D. C., for petitioner; Mitchell Rogovin, Asst. Atty. Gen., Lee A. Jackson, Jonathan S. Cohen, Attys., Dept. of Justice, Washington, D. C., on brief.

Harry S. Stark, Detroit, Mich., for respondents; Morris, Stark, Rowland, Regan & Reagan, Detroit, Mich., on brief.

Before WEICK, Chief Judge, COMBS, Circuit Judge, and GORDON, District Judge[*].

PER CURIAM.

1

This case involved the question whether a taxpayer, who transferred shares of stock to her children and to trustees of her grandchildren upon the agreement by the children to reimburse her for the gift tax and the agreement by the trustees to make reimbursement out of the corpora of the trusts, realized taxable income on the amounts paid to her pursuant to said agreements.

2

In the Tax Court, the Commissioner of Internal Revenue conceded that the amounts paid by the trustees to the doner were not taxable to her for the reason that the trustees did not personally agree to make the payments, but agreed only to reimburse her for the gift tax out of the corpora of the trusts. The Commissioner makes the same concession in this Court, although for a different reason.

3

The Tax Court, in a well-considered opinion written by Judge Fay, reported in 49 T.C. 356, found that the transaction constituted a net gift and not a part sale, part gift, as contended by the Commissioner, and that the donor did not realize taxable income as a result thereof.

4

The Tax Court also held that a donee's basis under Section 1015(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 (26 U.S.C. 1964 ed. § 1015) is the same as the donor's basis, and that under Section 1223(2) the donee is entitled to include the period of time the shares were held by the donor in determining the period during which the stock was held prior to a sale made by donee.

5

We are of the opinion that the Tax Court correctly decided the issues in this case, and we affirm on the opinion of Judge Fay.

Notes:

*

Honorable James F. Gordon, United States District Judge for the Western District of Kentucky, sitting by designation