Connection lost
Server error
O'DONNABHAIN v. COMMISSIONER Case Brief
Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs
Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.
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: A taxpayer sought to deduct costs for sex reassignment surgery as medical care. The Tax Court held that treatments for Gender Identity Disorder (GID), a recognized mental disorder, are deductible because they treat a “disease” and are not merely cosmetic under the Internal Revenue Code.
Legal Significance: This case established that Gender Identity Disorder is a “disease” for purposes of the I.R.C. § 213 medical expense deduction, clarifying that prescribed treatments like sex reassignment surgery are not per se non-deductible “cosmetic surgery.”
O'DONNABHAIN 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
The petitioner, Rhiannon O’Donnabhain, was born a genetic male but experienced a lifelong, persistent discomfort with her gender. A licensed psychotherapist diagnosed her with severe Gender Identity Disorder (GID), a mental disorder listed in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV-TR). Following the widely accepted Benjamin Standards of Care for GID, her prescribed treatment regimen included psychotherapy, feminizing hormone therapy, and a period of living full-time as a woman. In 2001, upon the recommendation of two mental health professionals, she underwent sex reassignment surgery (SRS), which surgically reconfigured her male genitalia into female genitalia, and breast augmentation surgery. The petitioner incurred and paid $21,741 for these procedures and related costs, which were not reimbursed by insurance. She claimed these expenses as a medical care deduction on her federal income tax return. The Commissioner of Internal Revenue disallowed the deduction, contending that GID was not a “disease” and that the procedures were non-deductible cosmetic surgery under I.R.C. § 213(d)(9).
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Do expenses for hormone therapy and sex reassignment surgery, undertaken to treat a diagnosed case of Gender Identity Disorder, qualify as deductible “medical care” under I.R.C. § 213, or are they non-deductible “cosmetic surgery” under § 213(d)(9)?
The court held that expenses for hormone therapy and sex reassignment surgery 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 f
IRAC Legal Analysis
Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.
Legal Issue
Do expenses for hormone therapy and sex reassignment surgery, undertaken to treat a diagnosed case of Gender Identity Disorder, qualify as deductible “medical care” under I.R.C. § 213, or are they non-deductible “cosmetic surgery” under § 213(d)(9)?
Conclusion
This landmark Tax Court decision affirmed that treatments for medically recognized mental 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 la
Legal Rule
Under I.R.C. § 213(d)(1)(A), "medical care" includes amounts paid for the "treatment... 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 v
Legal Analysis
The court's analysis proceeded in three steps. First, it determined whether GID 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, 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
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- The Tax Court held that Gender Identity Disorder (GID) is a
