HUDSON v. COMMISSIONER Case Brief
Complete case briefs with LSD+
Every LSD.Law brief pairs a full IRAC analysis with opinion summaries at three levels of depth, written by a team of Harvard Law and MIT graduates - a quick synopsis when you are pressed for time, the complete reasoning when you need to go deep.
Adaptive Case Views
Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.
Exam-Ready IRAC Format
We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.
Complex Cases, Clarified
We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.
Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis
tl;dr: Taxpayers bought a court judgment at a discount and later collected more than their cost from the debtor. The court held the profit was ordinary income, not capital gain, because collecting a debt is not a “sale or exchange.”
Legal Significance: This case establishes that the collection or settlement of a debt, even a purchased one, does not constitute a “sale or exchange” required for capital gains treatment. The gain is ordinary income because the asset is extinguished, not transferred.
HUDSON v. COMMISSIONER Law School Study Guide
Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.
Case Facts & Court Holding
Key Facts & Case Background
Petitioners, an attorney and a businessman, purchased a $75,702.12 judgment against a debtor, Howard Cole, from the original creditor’s estate for an aggregate cost of $11,004. The judgment was undisputed as a capital asset in the hands of the petitioners. Approximately two years later, the judgment debtor paid the petitioners $21,150 in a full settlement of the judgment. This transaction resulted in a profit of $10,146 for the petitioners. On their income tax returns, they reported this profit as a long-term capital gain, asserting that the settlement constituted a sale or exchange of the judgment. The Commissioner of Internal Revenue disagreed, assessing a deficiency and classifying the gain as ordinary income.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Does the gain realized by an assignee from the settlement of a purchased judgment with the judgment debtor constitute a “sale or exchange” of a capital asset qualifying for preferential capital gains tax treatment?
The gain is ordinary income. The settlement of a judgment by the Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ul
IRAC Legal Analysis
About IRAC analysis
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the structure professors expect in exam answers. Each LSD.Law brief states the issue, the governing rule with citations, the court's application of that rule, and the conclusion - the same reasoning pattern you will use on exams and in practice.
Legal Issue
Does the gain realized by an assignee from the settlement of a purchased judgment with the judgment debtor constitute a “sale or exchange” of a capital asset qualifying for preferential capital gains tax treatment?
Conclusion
This case provides a foundational precedent that the "sale or exchange" requirement Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud
Legal Rule
For a gain on the disposition of a capital asset to be Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu
Legal Analysis
The court's analysis centered on the statutory requirement of a "sale or Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, s
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- Gain from the settlement of a purchased judgment with the debtor