388 F.2d 476 (6th Cir. 1967), 17560, Goldman v. C.I.R.

Docket Nº:17560.
Citation:388 F.2d 476
Party Name:Douglas GOLDMAN and Evelyn K. Goldman, Petitioners, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent.
Case Date:December 21, 1967
Court:United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
 
FREE EXCERPT

Page 476

388 F.2d 476 (6th Cir. 1967)

Douglas GOLDMAN and Evelyn K. Goldman, Petitioners,

v.

COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent.

No. 17560.

United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

December 21, 1967

Page 477

Jerome Goldman, Cincinnati, Ohio, for petitioners.

Albert J. Beveridge, III, Department of Justice, Washington, D.C., Mitchell Rogovin, Asst. Atty. Gen., Lee A. Jackson, David O. Walter, Robert M. Willian, Attorneys, Department of Justice, Washington, D.C., on brief, for respondent.

Before PECK, McCREE and COMBS, Circuit Judges.

JOHN W. PECK, Circuit Judge.

In their income tax return for the calendar year 1961 petitioner (the singular is used because although this was a joint return, the issues herein considered arise solely from the husband's activities) claimed two charitable deductions which were disallowed by the respondent. Subsequent to such disallowance relief was sought in the Tax Court, and this appeal is from an order favorable to the Commissioner of Internal Revenue.

Page 478

The two alleged contributions (or, more accurately, the two categories of claimed contributions) are factually and in legal concept different from one another and will be herein separately treated. The first gift was of medical books and journals to the Good Samaritan Hospital of Cincinnati, Ohio, which is conceded by respondent to be a charitable organization under Section 170(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954. The charitable contribution claimed in the return on account of the donated books and journals was in the sum of $1,500. As has been indicated, this claimed deduction was disallowed in full, but on review the Tax Court determined the fair value of the books to be $415.50 and directed the allowance of a deduction in that sum. The issue here presented is therefore not whether a deduction on this account is allowable, but rather the method of computation to be followed in determining the amount of the deduction.

The books constituting the gift in question were bound volumes of medical journals published between 1938 and 1960. There were 42 such volumes of the Archives of Internal Medicine, 34 volumes of the American Journal of Medical Sciences, 26 of the Archives of Neurology and Psychiatry, 24 of the American Heart Journal and 25 of the American Journal of Medicine. As the record shows, and indeed as is obvious from a review of the titles, these volumes constitute a commodity for which there is a very limited market. Perhaps for this reason, in the briefs, throughout the record of the trial in the Tax Court and in the opinion therein filed difficulty is encountered in determining what method of computation was being urged or followed. Section 170-1(c)(1) of the Treasury Regulations on Income Tax provides that if a deductible contribution 'is made in property...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP