William C. and Elaine Gaskins - Page 9

                                        - 9 -                                         
          innocent spouse issues and a trial memorandum to respondent by              
          June 24, 1994.  The parties agreed to file status reports with              
          the Court by July 11, 1994.  The Court accepted the parties'                
          settlement.  After the settlement and Attorney Riley's agreement            
          to cooperate in the trial preparations, the Court vacated its               
          oral direction granting respondent's motion to partially dismiss            
          and deemed both respondent's motion to dismiss and petitioners'             
          motion to set aside the default to be moot.  The Court issued an            
          order dated June 10, 1994, requiring petitioners to provide the             
          documents relating to the innocent spouse issues and trial                  
          memorandum to respondent, and for the parties to file status                
          reports with the Court as agreed.  That order expressly provided            
          that "all documents relating to the innocent spouse issues in               
          this case must be furnished to counsel for respondent by                    
          petitioners on or before June 24, 1994."  Respondent's motion to            
          compel production of documents, including those documents on the            
          innocent spouse issues, had been granted by the Court in October            
          of 1993, and petitioners still had not complied with the Court's            
          1993 orders.                                                                
               On or about June 24, 1994, Attorney Riley provided                     
          respondent with copies of various documents.  Many of the copies            
          were illegible and many were items that petitioners previously              
          had denied possessing.  Respondent ascertained that Attorney                
          Riley had other documents in his possession that had not been               
          provided, documents that petitioners had earlier denied                     




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