- 39 -
investigate the plastics industry or the Sentinel EPE recycler.
Moreover, the accountant did not testify at the trial of
Friedman's case, and the substance of his advice, if any, is not
clear from Friedman's testimony. See Howard v. Commissioner, 931
F.2d 578, 582 (9th Cir. 1991), affg. T.C. Memo. 1988-531; Patin
v. Commissioner, 88 T.C. 1086, 1131 (1987), affd. without
published opinion 865 F.2d 1264 (5th Cir. 1989), affd. without
published opinion sub nom. Hatheway v. Commissioner, 856 F.2d 186
(4th Cir. 1988), affd. sub nom. Skeen v. Commissioner, 864 F.2d
93 (9th Cir. 1989), affd. sub nom. Gomberg v. Commissioner, 868
F.2d 865 (6th Cir. 1989), rejecting claims to reliance on an
accountant under analogous circumstances.
Friedman recalled that approximately eight other partners at
Shea & Gould either invested in, or to some extent reviewed, the
Plastics Recycling transactions. Of these, three were litigators
(Carroll, Ferraro, and Leon Gold), one specialized in bankruptcy
law (Hirshfield), two specialized in corporate and/or Federal
securities law (Arnold Jacobs and Thomas Constance), and one
specialized in taxation (Parker). Friedman did not indicate the
area of practice of the other partner he mentioned, Trost. Asked
if any of these partners were experts in the plastics industry,
Friedman replied: "I don't believe any of them were, although I
believe that * * * Dan Carroll had an engineering background and
Page: Previous 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011