268 F.3d 756, 2001 U.S. App. 86 Fair
Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1417; 81 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) P40,747
CASE SYNOPSIS: Plaintiff taxpayers
appealed the judgment from the United States Tax Court, which
determined a deficiency in their income tax.
FACTS: The taxpayers argued that the attorneys' fees paid pursuant to a court order approving the settlement of two class actions brought under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), 29 U.S.C.S. § 621 et seq., were not income. They argued that the ADEA was different from other fee-shifting statutes. The legislative history of the ADEA showed an intent to make the plaintiffs whole.
HOLDING:
The court disagreed, holding that while the ADEA did show an intent to make the plaintiff whole, the attorneys' fees were in addition to compensation for what he lost.
CONCLUSION: The judgment of the district court was affirmed.
FACTS: The taxpayers argued that the attorneys' fees paid pursuant to a court order approving the settlement of two class actions brought under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), 29 U.S.C.S. § 621 et seq., were not income. They argued that the ADEA was different from other fee-shifting statutes. The legislative history of the ADEA showed an intent to make the plaintiffs whole.
HOLDING:
The court disagreed, holding that while the ADEA did show an intent to make the plaintiff whole, the attorneys' fees were in addition to compensation for what he lost.
CONCLUSION: The judgment of the district court was affirmed.
---
Interested in learning how to get the top grades in your law school classes? Want to learn how to study smarter than your competition? Interested in transferring to a high ranked school?
No comments:
Post a Comment