17
with Ehmann & Waldman when he did not participate in that firm's
pension plan, 5 years with Altheimer & Gray, and 4 years in which
he allegedly conducted, as a sole proprietor, a private law
practice while employed full time with the IRS. After remand of
these cases, Brody Enterprises has abandoned the argument that
Brody's 1 year with Ehmann & Waldman constitutes "service with
the employer." Respondent concedes that Brody's years with Brody
Enterprises constitute "years of service with the employer" for
purposes of section 415(b)(5). Thus, Brody's 5 years with
Altheimer & Gray and 4 years in which he allegedly conducted a
private law practice remain at issue. We address first the 4
years in which Brody allegedly conducted a private law practice
while employed with the IRS.
Brody Enterprises argues that under section 414(c), Brody's
4 years as a sole proprietor, allegedly conducted while employed
by the IRS, must be combined with his years with Brody
Enterprises as "years of service with the employer" for purposes
of section 415(b)(5). Brody Enterprises has failed to show that
Brody conducted a private law practice during the 4 years that
Brody was employed by the IRS. Brody testified that in 1970 or
1971 he began a part-time law practice during the time he worked
for the IRS. He kept no records of the hours spent on his part-
time law practice. He worked for the IRS full time, and there is
no evidence of the extent of the alleged part-time practice. We
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011