Jones v. CIR ( 1997 )


Menu:
  •                                                                               F I L E D
    United States Court of Appeals
    Tenth Circuit
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    MAY 5 1997
    TENTH CIRCUIT
    PATRICK FISHER
    Clerk
    ROBERT P. JONES and DONNA M.
    JONES,
    Petitioners,
    v.                                             No. 96-9014
    (Docket No. 5043-94)
    COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL                              (United States Tax Court)
    REVENUE,
    Respondent.
    ORDER AND JUDGMENT*
    Before ANDERSON, HENRY, and BRISCOE, Circuit Judges.
    After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined
    unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this
    appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. Therefore, the case is ordered
    submitted without oral argument.
    Petitioners Robert P. Jones and Donna M. Jones, appearing pro se, appeal the Tax
    Court's decision that monies Robert Jones received in settlement of an Age
    Discrimination in Employment Act claim, 
    29 U.S.C. § 621
     et seq., are taxable and not
    excludable from taxable income under 
    26 U.S.C. § 104
    (a)(2).
    *
    This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of
    law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court generally disfavors the
    citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under
    the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.
    This issue was resolved in Commissioner v. Schleier, 
    115 S. Ct. 2159
     (1995). In
    Schleier, the Supreme Court held there are two independent requirements a taxpayer must
    meet before a recovery is excludable under § 104(a)(2): "First, the taxpayer must
    demonstrate that the underlying cause of action giving rise to the recovery is 'based upon
    tort or tort type rights'; and second, the taxpayer must show that the damages were
    received 'on account of personal injuries or sickness.'" 
    115 S. Ct. at 2167
    . The Court
    held a settlement under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act does not satisfy either
    requirement and no part of the settlement was excludable under § 104(a)(2). See Gray v.
    Commissioner, 
    104 F.3d 1226
    , 1227 (10th Cir. 1997).
    The judgment of the Tax Court is AFFIRMED. The mandate shall issue forthwith.
    Entered for the Court
    Mary Beck Briscoe
    Circuit Judge
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 96-9014

Filed Date: 5/5/1997

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/18/2021