Philippe and Nadine Grelsamer - Page 78

                                       - 78 -                                         
               We find that petitioners and Miller were treated equally to            
          the extent they were similarly situated, and differently to the             
          extent they were not.  Miller foreclosed the applicability of the           
          section 6621(c) increased rate of interest in his cases, while              
          petitioners concede it applies in their cases.  Petitioners                 
          failed to accept a piggyback settlement offer that would have               
          entitled them to the settlement reached in the Miller cases, and            
          also did not enter into a settlement offer made to them prior to            
          trial of a test case.  In contrast, Miller negotiated and                   
          accepted an offer that was essentially the same as the Plastics             
          Recycling project settlement offer rejected by petitioners prior            
          to trial.  Accordingly, petitioners' motions are not supported by           
          the principle of equality on which they rely.  Cf. Baratelli v.             
          Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1994-484.                                          
               In order to reflect the foregoing,                                     

                                             Appropriate orders will be               
                                        issued denying petitioners'                   
                                        motions, and decisions will be                
                                        entered under Rule 155.                       













Page:  Previous  59  60  61  62  63  64  65  66  67  68  69  70  71  72  73  74  75  76  77  78  

Last modified: May 25, 2011