Womack v. Commissioner
United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
510 F.3d 1295 (2007)
- Written by Jamie Milne, JD
Facts
Roland Womack (plaintiff) won the Florida State Lottery. Womack’s lottery winnings were payable in 20 annual installments of $150,000. For three years, Womack received the annual installments, reporting the income as ordinary income on his federal income tax returns. Womack then sold his right to receive the remaining payments to Singer Asset Finance Company (Singer) in exchange for an immediate lump-sum payment of $1,328,000. On his tax return, Womack reported the lump-sum payment as a capital gain from the sale of a long-term asset. Capital gains were taxed at a more favorable rate than ordinary income. Maria Spiridakos (plaintiff) also won the Florida State Lottery. Like Womack, she received annual installments for a few years, then sold the right to the remaining installments to Singer in exchange for a lump-sum payment. She, too, reported the lump-sum payment as a capital gain on her tax return. The commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service (commissioner) (defendant) issued deficiency notices to Womack and Spiridakos, arguing that each party’s lump-sum payment was ordinary income taxable at the higher rate. Womack and Spiridakos separately petitioned the United States Tax Court for redeterminations. The tax court consolidated the petitions and entered judgment in the commissioner’s favor, holding that the lump-sum payments were taxable as ordinary income. Womack and Spiridakos appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Martin, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.