Handelman v. Commissioner
Opinion
MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION
RAUM,
FINDINGS OF FACT
The parties have stipulated certain facts which, together with the accompanying exhibits, are incorporated herein by this reference.
Jeremy H. Handelman ("petitioner") resided in*46 New York, New York, at the time the petition was filed.
Petitioner was a student in the faculty of medicine of the free University of Brussels in Belgium, during the period 1962 to 1969. He was graduated from the University in 1969 with the degree of Doctor of Medicine, and returned to this country following his graduation. Immediately upon his return, he began his internship at the Mountainside Hospital, Montclair, New Jersey.
Petitioner accepted an initial appointment as an intern at Mountainside for the period July 1, 1969 through June 30, 1970. After completing this one year internship, he accepted a second appointment, this time as a resident, for the period August 7, 1970 through August 6, 1971. Thus during the tax year in question, petitioner's association with the hospital may be represented as follows:
| Tax Year 1970 | |
| Month | Status |
| January through June | Intern |
| August through December | Resident |
The Mountainside Hospital is a private, nonprofit institution which provides both patient care services and training programs for interns and residents. These programs meet the standards of the Council on Medical Education of the American Medical Association, *47 as set forth in the Council's publications, "Essentials of An Approved Internship", and "Essentials of Approved Residencies".
In 1970-1971, the hospital paid "stipends" to interns and residents in the following amounts:
| Status | Amount |
| Intern | $625 per month |
| Resident -- 1st Year | $675 per month |
| Resident -- 2nd Year | $700 per month |
| Resident -- 3rd Year | $725 per month |
| Resident -- 4th Year | $750 per month |
Petitioner's duties, both as an intern participating in a rotating internship, and as a resident in internal medicine, were typical of those of interns and residents in similar programs throughout the country. For those patients*48 assigned to his care, petitioner performed physical examinations, recorded medical histories, diagnosed illnesses, prescribed treatments, maintained progress reports, and responded to emergency situations. As an intern, petitioner was also required to attend daily clinical conferences. These functions were performed under the supervision of, and in consultation with, more senior staff doctors. As a resident, petitioner was expected to supervise and consult with interns who needed his help. To perform these duties, petitioner worked regular daily hours and, additionally, was on call every third night and weekend as an intern, and every fourth night and weekend as a resident.
Relying upon
OPINION
The general rule of
The following characteristics of Dr. Handelman's internship and residency indicate that the "stipends" he received represented compensation for the work he performed: (1) The amount depended upon the recipient's level of training and not upon his economic status.
Petitioner's attempts to distinguish his internship and residency from those which we have examined in other cases were unpersuasive. 2 When questioned as to the facts underlying his assertions, petitioner admitted that there was little difference between his training and that provided in other hospitals. These admissions*52 are supported by the documentary exhibits which describe in great detail the duties of interns and residents at Mountainside Hospital.
Footnotes
1. Since the exclusion is limited by
section 117(b)(2)(B)↩ "to an amount equal to $300 times the number of months for which the recipient received amounts under the scholarship or fellowship grant during such taxable year", and since petitioner's internship and residency during 1970 covered a period of slightly less than 11 months, it is difficult to see how he could in any event qualify for more than an allocable portion of the full $3,600 exclusion.2. We do not take seriously petitioner's argument that as an intern he could provide no service of value to the hospital because his lack of training made him "dangerous to the ultimate well-being of [his] patients".↩
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.