Connie Lucic, Petitioner, and Michael J. Lucic, Intervenor - Page 8




                                        - 8 -                                         
          dismissal for failing to appear at trial and properly prosecute             
          any claims or defenses he may have after he was properly given              
          notice of the trial”.  Tipton v. Commissioner, supra at 218.                
          Intervenor failed to appear at trial and properly prosecute any             
          claims or defenses he may have after he was properly given notice           
          of the trial.  Accordingly, on our own motion, we shall dismiss             
          intervenor.  For the sake of completeness, however, we shall                
          address intervenor’s remaining objections to respondent’s motion            
          for entry of decision.                                                      
               Intervenor contends that respondent and petitioner had                 
          pretrial conferences from which he was improperly excluded.                 
          Petitioner and respondent contend that no pretrial conferences              
          took place; rather, they contend, as a result of petitioner’s               
          responses to respondent’s discovery requests (which were also               
          served on intervenor without objection thereto), respondent                 
          decided to concede that petitioner was entitled to relief from              
          the 2000 joint and several tax liability.  Intervenor concedes              
          that respondent informed him 2 weeks before trial of respondent’s           
          decision to settle the case.  Intervenor has failed to allege any           
          specific facts which tend to show that respondent and petitioner            
          engaged in any misconduct by agreeing to the stipulation of                 
          settled issues.                                                             
               Intervenor also contends that respondent and petitioner are            
          perpetrating a fraud on the Court by seeking to have this Court             







Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next 

Last modified: November 10, 2007