Menu
Tax Notes logo
HOMETax Notes ResearchFederalCourt Documentscourt opinions and orders

Canelo v. Commissioner

AUG. 11, 1971

Canelo v. Commissioner

DATED AUG. 11, 1971
DOCUMENT ATTRIBUTES
  • Case Name
    ADOLPH B. CANELO III AND SALLY M. CANELO, Appellants, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Appellee THOMAS J. KANE, JR., AND KATHRYN H. KANE, Appellants, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Appellee
  • Court
    United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
  • Docket
    No. 26157
    No. 26158
  • Judge
    Hamley and Koelsch, Circuit Judges, and Goodwin, District Judge. /*/
  • Parallel Citation
    447 F.2d 484
    71-2 U.S. Tax Cas. (CCH) P9598
    28 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 5543
  • Language
    English
  • Tax Analysts Electronic Citation
    1971 LEX 95-467

Canelo v. Commissioner

         UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

 

 

                           August 11, 1971

 

 

     Affirmed.

 

 

     PER CURIAM

 

 

These consolidated appeals challenge the Tax Court's decision that a law partnership on a cash basis may not deduct as ordinary and necessary business expenses the various litigation costs advanced for clients on contingent-fee cases in which the advances are to be repaid from the amount recovered for the client. The opinion of the Tax Court is reported at 53 T.C. 217 (1970).

The Tax Court held that the advances were in the nature of loans, citing Burnett v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 356 F.2d 755 (5th Cir. 1966), cert. den. 385 U.S. 832, 87 S. Ct. 77, 17 L. Ed. 2d 68 (1966).

In Hearn v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 309 F.2d 431 (9th Cir. 1962), cert. den. 373 U.S. 909, 83 S. Ct. 1299, 10 L. Ed. 2d 411 (1963), we held that uncollected litigation expenses could not be deducted under Section 162 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 in the year of the expenditure because they might later be recovered. We also held that such advances could not be treated as bad debts until they became worthless. In the case at bar, the Tax Court found that the law firm expected to be repaid, and, in fact, in most cases was repaid by its clients. Under the usual methods of accounting, such transactions are treated as loans.

The decision of the Tax Court is consistent with the cited cases and with the Congressional intent expressed in Section 162.

Affirmed.

 

FOOTNOTE TO OPINION

 

 

/*/ The Honorable Alfred T. Goodwin, District Judge for the District of Oregon, sitting by designation.

 

END OF FOOTNOTE TO OPINION
DOCUMENT ATTRIBUTES
  • Case Name
    ADOLPH B. CANELO III AND SALLY M. CANELO, Appellants, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Appellee THOMAS J. KANE, JR., AND KATHRYN H. KANE, Appellants, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Appellee
  • Court
    United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
  • Docket
    No. 26157
    No. 26158
  • Judge
    Hamley and Koelsch, Circuit Judges, and Goodwin, District Judge. /*/
  • Parallel Citation
    447 F.2d 484
    71-2 U.S. Tax Cas. (CCH) P9598
    28 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 5543
  • Language
    English
  • Tax Analysts Electronic Citation
    1971 LEX 95-467
Copy RID