Wyatt Earp was married to Tamsin Earp before separating in 2013. Wyatt and Ms. Earp hadtwo children, who lived with Ms. Earp after the separation. Ms. Earp filed for divorce inCalifornia Superior Court. While the divorce case was pending, Wyatt and Ms. Earp enteredinto a stipulated agreement that was incorporated into a temporary order of the SuperiorCourt on December 6, 2014. The first support order required Wyatt to pay Ms. Earp $3,000as family support for January 2015. The Superior Court issued a second support order twomonths after the first support order was issued. Wyatt was obligated under the secondsupport order to continue to pay Ms. Earp's family support payments of $3,000 per monthuntil a trial in the divorce case was held. The Superior Court indicated in the second supportorder that the family support payments were for both spousal support and child support. Itdid not allocate, however, any specific portion of the family support payments as spousalsupport or child support in the second support order or the first support order. Neither thefirst support order nor the second support order included an explicit condition that wouldterminate Wyatt's obligation to make the family support payments on Ms. Earp's death.Wyatt made $24,491 in family support payments during 2015 under the support orders. Onhis individual income tax return for 2015, Wyatt wants to claim an alimony deduction for thefamily support payments.

1. What important facts and issues should be recognized

2. What would be the correct conclusion

Answer rating: 100% (QA)

Facts and Issues Recognized The fact of this case is primary whether Wyatts family support paymen... View the full answer