- 15 -
The Court directed that, in the absence of an order granting any
subsequent motions by petitioner, simultaneous opening briefs
were due from the parties July 5, 1995, and answering briefs were
due August 21, 1995.
On May 8, 1995, petitioner filed a Motion for
Reconsideration of Default Judgment and New Trial and Offers of
Proof. Petitioner offered no excuse for his prior failures to
comply with Court Orders or to proceed to trial, had not as of
that time employed counsel, and merely represented that he was
"prepared to contact respondent in the ensuing week to discuss a
possible third stipulation of facts." Petitioner's Offers of
Proof consisted of a statement of his intention to call Timbie,
who would give his opinion that the returns were prepared "in
accordance with the provisions of the applicable Internal Revenue
Code and applicable regulations" and Onofrio, who would testify
that he had access to petitioner's records and would give the
same opinion. Further, according to the offer of proof, the
witnesses would testify that petitioner did not intend to
misstate or misrepresent his income.
Because the proffered testimony of Timbie and Onofrio was
primarily inadmissible opinion, was inconsistent with the
testimony previously given by Timbie and Lipton, and was not
sufficient to comply with the Court's direction, petitioner's
motion for reconsideration was denied May 22, 1995. Petitioner
failed to file the briefs ordered by the Court.
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011