Vincent and Clotilde Farrell, Jr. - Page 7

                                        - 7 -                                         
          December 31, 1984, would be calculated at 120 percent of the                
          statutory rate under section 6621(c).  In a second notice of                
          deficiency issued that same date, respondent determined a                   
          deficiency in petitioners' 1978 Federal income tax due solely to            
          the disallowance of a credit carryback that arose in 1981.  A               
          timely petition to this Court was filed by petitioners on January           
          19, 1988 (docket No. 1173-88).5  Petitioners' counsel at the time           
          was Jerome R. Rosenberg (Rosenberg).                                        
               Several months earlier, on June 12, 1987, this Court had               
          ordered that respondent and the lead counsel for the taxpayers in           
          Plastics Recycling cases designate lead cases that would present            
          all issues involved in the Plastics Recycling cases.  The                   
          following cases were selected:  (1) Fine v. Commissioner, docket            
          No. 35437-85; (2) Miller v. Commissioner, docket No. 10382-86               
          (concerning taxable years 1982 and 1983); and (3) Miller v.                 
          Commissioner, docket No. 10383-86 (concerning taxable years 1979            
          and 1980).  In early 1988, the Fine case was concluded without              
          trial.  In place of the Fine case, the parties thereafter                   
          selected, and the Court designated, the case of Provizer v.                 
          Commissioner, docket No. 27141-86, as a lead case along with the            




          5    Certain background facts and circumstances relating to                 
          docket No. 1173-88 apparently are not disputed by the parties,              
          and we have discussed these matters for the sake of completeness.           
          As we have noted, granting petitioners' motion for leave would              
          require further proceedings.                                                




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011