-4-
finding with respect to petitioner’s 1990 tax liability, and (4)
Anthony’s conviction cannot collaterally estop petitioner,
because Anthony and petitioner are separate parties with separate
tax liabilities.
In the reply to petitioner’s response, respondent repeats
the reliance on the Donnoras’ deemed admissions in their docket
and on Anthony’s section 7206(2) conviction. Respondent concedes
that, if we allow the Donnoras to amend their reply in their
docket, then “summary judgment on all the issues [in the instant
case] is not proper.” However, respondent contends, respondent
would still be entitled to partial summary judgment that
petitioner “is collaterally estopped from denying that there was
a willful omission of income on Forkston’s corporate income tax
returns for 1988 through 1990”. We have ruled that the Donnoras
are permitted to amend their reply in their docket. Donnora v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1998-187.
Our findings are based entirely on those matters that are
admitted in the pleadings or that are admitted or deemed admitted
in the motion papers in the instant case.
Background--Facts
Petitioner was a Pennsylvania corporation with its business
address in Mehoopany, Pennsylvania, when the petition was filed
in the instant case. The Donnoras owned and were employed by
petitioner in 1990. Petitioner sold fireworks.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011