the motion of petitioner Suzanne J. Stillman (hereinafter petitioner when used
in the singular) for leave to file a motion to vacate decision out of time
(the Motion for Leave). This case was one of many cases involving the tax
shelter project, referred to as the MAR oil cases, in which the taxpayers
invested in oil and gas partnerships. See Osterhout v. Commissioner, T.C.
Memo. 1993-251.
On September 10, 1985, respondent issued a notice of deficiency which
determined a deficiency in petitioners' 1981 Federal income tax, plus
additions to tax in connection with petitioners' investment in certain MAR oil
partnerships. The petition herein was timely filed on behalf of petitioners
by their then attorneys Bruce I. Hochman and Martin N. Gelfand of the law firm
of Hochman, Salkin and DeRoy (the Hochman firm). A Decision in this case was
entered by this Court "pursuant to an agreement of the parties" on April 13,
1990, providing for a deficiency in income tax in the amount of $84,309 and no
additions to tax. In addition to the signatures of the parties' attorneys,
the stipulated decision document bore the signatures of both petitioners
herein. Petitioner now seeks leave to vacate that decision in order to raise
the defense of "innocent spouse". Summary of Facts
By memorandum dated August 31, 1989, (the MAR Memorandum) Mr. Gelfand
communicated the terms and a detailed legal analysis of a settlement offer
concerning the MAR Oil cases to the MAR Oil investors, and solicited their
acceptance or rejection of the offer on an enclosed Statement of Settlement.
In part, the MAR Memorandum advised MAR Oil investors of the availability of
the innocent spouse defense. By signing the Statement of Settlement,
taxpayers represented that they received the MAR memorandum.
The Hochman firm mailed the MAR Memorandum and Statement of Settlement,
intended for both petitioner and Mr. Stillman, to 175 Sonoma Lane, Carmel
Highlands, California, which was Mr. Stillman's address (but an address at
which petitioner never resided). Mr. Stillman did not forward a copy of the
MAR Memorandum to petitioner. Mr. Stillman received and reviewed the MAR
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011