Felcyn

Felcyn v. United States

Good Law
691 F. Supp. 205·1988 WL 73368·62 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 5026·1988 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9488
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaJune 2, 1988CV 82-2674 RG (Bx)California4,560 words

Opinion

Opinion

Gadbois, J.

FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

For purposes of and in support of the Order of Judgment, the court makes the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions of law:

FINDINGS OF FACT

A. The Tax Deduction

1.On her tax return for 1977, plaintiff Gloria Felcyn (“Felcyn”) claimed an investment interest expense deduction of $5,504.00. This deduction was identified as her share of the investment interest expense claimed on the 1977 tax return of Duncan Properties Partnership (“Duncan”) and as a carryover of investment interest expenses claimed by Duncan for 1976. The Internal Revenue Service disallowed this deduction and based on such disallowance assessed a tax deficiency against Felcyn, which was paid. By the present action Felcyn seeks a refund of such deficiency paid.

2. Plaintiffs expenses in this litigation are paid by Harry Margolis. The $1,600 deficiency in this case was paid from an account in the name of Harry Margolis.

B. The Duncan Transactions

3. The signatures of Felcyn, along with the signatures of William Berman, David H. Bruce, Mark D. Schiavenza, Robert S. Muehlenbeck, Philip M. Bardack, Ondrej Kojnok, R.H. Adolphson and G. Louis Graziadio III, appear on an…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.