People v. Dustov (Muhammad)

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• rejecting a taxpayer’s argument that Congress intended for married couples filing separately to receive the same treatment under § 163(h)(3) as married couples filing jointly
• rejecting a taxpayer’s argument that Congress intended for married couples filing separately to receive the same treatment under § 163(h)(3) as married couples filing jointly
• “[T]he parenthetical indebtedness limitations of section 163(h)(3)(B)(ii) and (C)(ii) are $550,000 for each spouse filing a separate return.” (emphasis added)
• “[T]he parenthetical indebtedness limitations ... are $550,000 for each spouse filing a separate return.” (emphasis added)
• “[T]he parenthetical indebtedness limitations of section 163(h)(3)(B)(ii) and (C)(ii) are $550,000 for each spouse filing a separate return.” (emphasis added)
• “[T]he parenthetical indebtedness limitations . . . are $550,000 for each spouse filing a separate return.” (emphasis added)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).