Charles W. P. Kamanski & Robin Kamanski v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue, 477 F.2d 452 (9th Cir. 1973). · Go Syfert
Search
Charles W. P. Kamanski & Robin Kamanski v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue, 477 F.2d 452 (9th Cir. 1973). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
28 citation events (10 in the last 25 years) across 3 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Jennifer L. Mandel and Eric P. Mandel, Relators v. Commissioner of Revenue (minn, 2016-12-14)
Treatment trajectory · 1974 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1974 2000 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 8 distinct citers. How cited ↗
cited Cited as authority (rule) Jennifer L. Mandel and Eric P. Mandel, Relators v. Commissioner of Revenue
Minn. · 2016 · confidence medium
Kamanski v. Comm’r, 477 F.2d 452, 452-53 (9th Cir. 1973); Chamales v. Comm’r, 79 T.C.M.
discussed Cited "see" George W. Finkbohner, Jr. And Beverly R. Finkbohner v. United States (2×)
11th Cir. · 1986 · signal: see · confidence high
See Kamanski, 477 F.2d at 452 ; Capozzoli, 753 F.2d 1073 (relying on Kamanski ).
cited Cited "see, e.g." Thomas K. Richey & Maureen P. Cleary
Tax Ct. · 2023 · signal: see also · confidence low
Citizens Bank, 28 T.C. at 720 ; see also Kamanski v. Commissioner, 477 F.2d 452 , 452–53 (9th Cir. 1973) (loss in value from predictions of future casualties not casualty loss), aff’g 29 T.C.M.
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Louis S. Shuman & Sandra Shuman v. Commissioner
Tax Ct. · 2018 · signal: see also · confidence low
Courts have repeatedly ruled that “physical damage or destruction of property is an inherent prerequisite in showing a casualty loss.” Citizens Bank of Weston v. Commissioner, 28 T.C. 717, 720 (1957), aff’d, 252 F.2d 425 (4th Cir. 1958); see also Kamanski v. Commissioner, 477 F.2d 452 (9th Cir. 1973), aff’g T.C.
cited Cited "see, e.g." Pang v. Comm'r
Tax Ct. · 2011 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., Kamanski v. Commissioner , 477 F.2d 452 (9th Cir. 1973) , affg.
cited Cited "see, e.g." Martin v. Commissioner
Tax Ct. · 2000 · signal: see also · confidence low
See id.; see also Kamanski v. Commissioner, 477 F.2d 452 (9th Cir. 1973) , affg.
cited Cited "see, e.g." TORRE
unknown court · Nor · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., Kamanski v. Commissioner, 477 F.2d 452 (9th Cir. 1973) , affg.
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Chamales
unknown court · Art · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., Kamanski v. Commissioner, 477 F.2d at 452 ; Pulvers v. Commissioner, 407 F.2d 838 , 839 (9th Cir. 1969) , affg. 48 T.C. 245 (1967) . *50 In Pulvers v. Commissioner, supra at 839 , the Court of Appeals reviewed the specific casualties enumerated in section 165(c)(3) and concluded: "Each of those surely involves physical damage or loss of the physical property.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Charles W. P. KAMANSKI and Robin Kamanski, Petitioners-Appellants,
v.
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent-Appellee
71-2103.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Apr 16, 1973.
477 F.2d 452
Charles W. P. Kamanski, in pro. per., Scott P. Crampton, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tax Div., Dept. of Justice, K. Martin Worthy, Chief Counsel, IRS, Washington, D. C., for respondent-appellee.
Merrill, Koelsch, Kilkenny.
Cited by 17 opinions  |  Published
MERRILL, Circuit Judge:

The question presented is taxpayers’ right to a casualty loss deduction under § 165(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, by virtue of loss in property value following an earthslide.

The slide occurred a short distance from taxpayers’ residence. It did minor physical damage to their property but as a consequence the market value of the property was reduced by approximately $23,000. Loss in property value in the sum of $21,094.27 was realized by taxpayers in disposing of their property. This was the amount they had invested and the value of the equity they enjoyed subject to trust deed. Following the slide they permitted the property to revert to the trust deed holder and accordingly realized their loss. They claimed a deduction in this amount as a casualty loss. This deduction was denied by the Commissioner. Minor physical damage by way of cracks in walls and pavements was sustained by the taxpayers. In absence of proof of the monetary extent of this damage, the Commissioner allowed a loss in the sum of $1,000 and rejected further claim of loss. A deficiency in income tax was determined accordingly. The Tax Court upheld the Commissioner’s determination. Its opinion appears at 29 T.C.M. 1702.

The Tax Court ruled that the loss sustained was a nondeductible personal loss in disposition of residential property and not a casualty loss; that the drop in market value was not due to physical damage caused by the slide, but to “buyer resistance”; that casualty loss is limited to damage directly caused by the casualty. We agree.

The loss claimed by taxpayers was not attributable to the slide itself, but to the existence of soil conditions that the occurrence of the slide served to demonstrate. The loss in market value was not due to damage caused by the casualty, but to buyer predictions that future casualties would cause further damage. This may well be an accurate prediction but the claim of loss must await the[*453] event. Loss of value based upon such a prediction is not deductible as casualty loss under § 165(c)(3). See Squirt Co. v. Commissioner, 423 F.2d 710 (9th Cir. 1970); Pulvers v. Commissioner, 407 F.2d 838 (9th Cir. 1969).

Affirmed.