Confirm favorite deletion?
Income Tax Keyed to Bankman
Clark v. Commissioner
Citation:40 B.T.A. 333 (1939), acq. 1957-1 C.B. 4
In 1932, Petitioner was advised by his tax counsel to file jointly with his wife as opposed to filing separately. After filing their joint return, the Commissioner of Internal Revenue asserted a deficiency based on an error made by tax counsel. Later on, tax counsel admitted that if not for the error, he would have advised Petitioner to file separately with his wife which would have led to savings of $19,941.10. In 1934, Tax counsel paid this amount to Petitioner in order to compensate for his negligent mistake. Petitioner did not include this payment in his income and the Commissioner asserted a deficiency for failing to report this income.
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.
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.