Laurence R. & Arline P. Green, & Joseph E. & Judith T. Gentle v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue, 60 F.3d 142 (2d Cir. 1995). · Go Syfert
Search
Laurence R. & Arline P. Green, & Joseph E. & Judith T. Gentle v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue, 60 F.3d 142 (2d Cir. 1995). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
24 citation events (21 in the last 25 years) across 3 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Kiczuk v. United States (ctd, 2023-03-31)
Treatment trajectory · 1998 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1998 2012 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 3 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Kiczuk v. United States
D. Conn. · 2023 · confidence medium
In determining whether a statute is in the nature of a workmen’s compensation act, the proper focus is on “the nature of the statute, rather than the source of the injury, and a statute that does not distinguish between work-related injuries and other types of injuries is not ‘in the nature of a workmen’s compensation statute.’” Rutter, 760 F.2d at 468 . “[U]nless a statute contains some provision restricting the payment of benefits to cases of work-related disabilities, it is not in the nature of a workmen’s compensation statute.” Green v. Comm’r, 60 F.3d 142, 143 (2d Cir.…
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Raymond D. Wallace v. United States
7th Cir. · 1998 · confidence medium
In determining whether statutes that provide benefits qualify as “workmen’s compensation acts” for purposes of § 104(a), courts have considered, among other factors, whether the statutory benefits were paid for work-related ailments, see Green v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 60 F.3d 142, 143 (2d Cir.1995) (per curiam); Take v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 804 F.2d 553, 557 (9th Cir.1986); whether the statute predicates benefits on a finding of fault on the part of the employer, see Kane v. United States, 43 F.3d 1446, 1449 (Fed.Cir.1994); and whether the statute provides the e…
cited Cited "see" Kiczuk v. United States
D. Conn. · 2023 · signal: see · confidence high
See Def.’s Mem. in Supp. at 9–10, ECF No. 35-3 (emphasis added by Defendant) (quoting Rutter, 760 F.2d at 468 , and Green v. Comm’r, 60 F.3d 142, 143 (2d Cir. 1995)).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Laurence R. and Arline P. GREEN, and Joseph E. and Judith T. Gentle, Petitioners-Appellants,
v.
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent-Appellee
1551, Docket 94-4214.
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
Jul 21, 1995.
60 F.3d 142
1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 19695
Jonathan J. Klein, Trumbull, CT, for petitioners-appellants., Jonathan A. Wasserman, Tax Div., U.S. Dept, of Justice, Washington, DC (Loretta C. Argrett, Asst. Atty. Gen., Gary R. Allen and Ann B. Durney, Tax Div., U.S. Dept, of Justice, of counsel) for respondent-appellee.
Winter, Calabresi, Cabranes.
Cited by 7 opinions  |  Published
1 passage pin-cited by 1 case
Pinpoint authority: bottom 59%
Citer courts: Second Circuit (1)
PER CURIAM:

Laurence and Arline Green and Joseph and Judith Gentle appeal from decisions of the Tax Court holding that benefits they received under the Connecticut Heart and Hypertension Act, Conn.Gen.Stat.Ann. § 7-433c (West 1989), are part of gross income for federal tax purposes. Benefits are paid under Section 7-433c to firefighters and police officers who suffer “either off duty or on duty any condition or impairment of health caused by hypertension or heart disease.” Id. The Greens and the Gentles argue that such benefits should be exempt from taxation under applicable provisions of the Internal Revenue Code and regulations because the Connecticut act is “a statute in the nature of a workmen’s compensation act which provides compensation to employees for personal injuries or sickness incurred in the course of employment.” 26 C.F.R. § 1.104 — 1(b).

However, a statute that provides benefits to ailing employees is not considered to be “in the nature of a workmen’s compensation act” unless the benefits are paid for ailments that are work-related. As we noted in Rutter v. Commissioner, 760 F.2d 466 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 848, 106 S.Ct. 141, 88 L.Ed.2d 116 (1986), “[ujnless a statute contains some provision restricting the payment of benefits to eases of work-related disabilities, it is not in the nature of a workmen’s compensation statute.” Id. at 468; see also Take v. Commissioner, 804 F.2d 663 (9th Cir.1986). Because Section 7-433c provides benefits to police officers and firefighters who suffer from hypertension and heart disease whether or not those conditions are work-related, benefits paid thereunder are part of gross income.

We therefore affirm.