- 5 -
Rules of Civil Procedure will be considered in applying Rule 52.
Estate of Jephson v. Commissioner, 81 T.C. 999, 1000-1001 (1983);
see also Note to Tax Court Rule 52, 60 T.C. 1093.
In Estate of Jephson v. Commissioner, supra at 1001, we set
forth various principles, along with citations (omitted here), to
be followed in connection with motions to strike, as follows:
Motions to strike under FRCP 12(f) have not been
favored by the Federal courts. “Matter will not be
stricken from a pleading unless it is clear that it can
have no possible bearing upon the subject matter of the
litigation.” “A motion to strike should be granted
only when the allegations have no possible relation to
the controversy. When the court is in doubt whether
under any contingency the matter may raise an issue,
the motion should be denied.” If the matter that is
the subject of the motion involves disputed and
substantial questions of law, the motion should be
denied and the allegations should be determined on the
merits. In addition, a motion to strike will usually
not be granted unless there is a showing of prejudice
to the moving party. [Citations omitted.]
As discussed above, respondent does not allege that any
prejudice will occur if petitioner is allowed to amend the
petition to include the new factual allegations. There appear to
be no new issues raised by or with these factual allegations, and
respondent appears not to question the truth of the allegations.
Respondent questions only the legal weight or relevancy that
should be given to those alleged facts. Respondent’s objection
to allegations concerning the examination agent’s conclusions
about the stock valuation is premature. We cannot decide at this
juncture that petitioner’s allegations can have no possible
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011