Leslie R. Barth - Page 9

                                                - 9 -                                                   
            issue were due to fraud, facts concerning petitioner's education                            
            and employment; his failure to file timely returns; the omission                            
            of substantial amounts of income on the returns that were                                   
            belatedly filed; and his failure to maintain, or to submit for                              
            examination, complete and adequate books and records.  Petitioner                           
            belatedly filed a reply, denying the allegations but not setting                            
            forth any specific facts contradicting them.                                                
                  By notice served August 28, 1992, this case was set for                               
            trial in New York on February 1, 1993.  On November 10, 1992,                               
            petitioner filed a Motion for Continuance and a Motion to Change                            
            the Place of Trial to Hartford, Connecticut.  In the Motion for                             
            Continuance, petitioner represented that he was released from the                           
            Federal Correctional Institute on August 22, 1991, and, since                               
            then, had been attempting to obtain his records to prepare                                  
            properly for trial.  He also represented that he had been                                   
            attempting to accumulate sufficient funds to retain counsel.                                
            Petitioner's motions were granted.                                                          
                  By notice served January 6, 1993, the case was set for trial                          
            on June 7, 1993, in Hartford, Connecticut.  On May 13, 1993,                                
            petitioner filed a Motion for Continuance, representing that he                             
            had been indicted by the United States on several counts of mail                            
            fraud, that his mail fraud trial was scheduled to commence on                               
            May 10, 1993, and that he was unable to prepare for trial in this                           
            case during the mail fraud trial.  Respondent did not object, and                           
            petitioner's motion was granted.                                                            

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