Confirm favorite deletion?
Income Tax Keyed to Lind
Andrews v. Commissioner
Only StudyBuddy Pro offers the complete Case Brief Anatomy*
Access the most important case brief elements for optimal case understanding.
*Case Brief Anatomy includes: Brief Prologue, Complete Case Brief, Brief Epilogue
- The Brief Prologue provides necessary case brief introductory information and includes:
- Topic: Identifies the topic of law and where this case fits within your course outline.
- Parties: Identifies the cast of characters involved in the case.
- Procedural Posture & History: Shares the case history with how lower courts have ruled on the matter.
- Case Key Terms, Acts, Doctrines, etc.: A case specific Legal Term Dictionary.
- Case Doctrines, Acts, Statutes, Amendments and Treatises: Identifies and Defines Legal Authority used in this case.
- The Case Brief is the complete case summarized and authored in the traditional Law School I.R.A.C. format. The Pro case brief includes:
- Brief Facts: A Synopsis of the Facts of the case.
- Rule of Law: Identifies the Legal Principle the Court used in deciding the case.
- Facts: What are the factual circumstances that gave rise to the civil or criminal case? What is the relationship of the Parties that are involved in the case. Review the Facts of this case here:
Edward Andrews resided with his wife in Lynnfield, Massachusetts. He purchased in condominium in Pompano Beach, Florida to be used as a residence when in Florida on business. He sold the condominium because the neighborhood became unsafe and moved to a single family home in Lighthouse Point, Florida. He maintained a swimming pool business in Massachusetts and, during the off-season, raced and bred horses in Pompano, Florida. He used the Florida home as his residence when in Florida during the racing season. Andrews and his wife sought deduct travel expenses, including meals and costs, associated with the second home in Florida because they were “in the pursuit of a trade or business. The Commissioner did not allow the deduction and the Andrews’ filed suit seeking a re-determination. The Tax Court held that the Andrews were not “away from home” when the expenses were incurred.
- Issue(s): Lists the Questions of Law that are raised by the Facts of the case.
- Holding: Shares the Court's answer to the legal questions raised in the issue.
- Concurring / Dissenting Opinions: Includes valuable concurring or dissenting opinions and their key points.
- Reasoning and Analysis: Identifies the chain of argument(s) which led the judges to rule as they did.
- The Brief Prologue closes the case brief with important forward-looking discussion and includes:
- Policy: Identifies the Policy if any that has been established by the case.
- Court Direction: Shares where the Court went from here for this case.