If any court for tax purposes would consider such money in the OP's example as TT, I would be surprised.
I thought you had a United States Supreme Court case in mind.
The case as linked IMO should have been decided as MISLAID property, not TT, but when it comes to Income tax, it does not suprise me how the Court ruled.
If we go on a National basis for TT, any citations for that.
I found the answer to my own question. The 6th Circuit upheld the District Court ruling.
http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=1623994062725875953&hl=en&as_sdt=2&as_vis=1&oi=scholarr
This above has a link to the actual District Court ruling, and very interesting, a suprise to me, they classified it as "found money", I suppose TT is ALL inclusive of lost or TT. It also has citations from Ohio law.
**************Part III of Subchapter B (Sections 101 et seq.) deals with items specifically excluded from gross income, and
found money is not listed in those sections either. This absence of express mention in any of the code sections necessitates a return to the "all income from whatever source" language of Section 61(a) of the code, and the express statement there that gross income is "not limited to" the following fifteen examples. Section 1.61-1(a) of the Treasury Regulations, the corresponding section to Section 61(a) in the 1954 Code, reiterates this broad construction of gross income, providing in part:
"Gross income means all income from whatever source derived, unless excluded by law. Gross income includes income realized in any form, whether in money, property, or services. * * *" (Emphasis added.)
The decisions of the United States Supreme Court have frequently stated that this broad all-inclusive language was used by Congress to exert the full measure of its taxing power under the Sixteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Glenshaw Glass Co., 348 U.S. 426, 429, 75 S.Ct. 473, 99 L.Ed. 483 (1955); Helvering v. Clifford, 309 U.S. 331, 334, 60 S.Ct. 554, 84 L.Ed. 788 (1940); Helvering v. Midland Mutual Life Ins. Co., 300 U.S. 216, 223, 57 S.Ct. 423, 81 L.Ed. 612 (1937); Douglas v. Willcuts, 296 U.S. 1, 9, 56 S.Ct. 59, 80 L.Ed. 3 (1935); Irwin v. Gavit, 268 U.S. 161, 166, 45 S.Ct. 475, 69 L.Ed. 897 (1925)**************.
Dave that was an excellent citation.
Yes, you can bet, if it is kept, it is taxable, if claimed that is.