- 71 -
435; Fisher v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1994-434. Such matters
are not disputed by the parties. We discuss the background
matters for the sake of completeness. As we have noted, granting
petitioners' motion for leave would require further proceedings.
The Estate of Satin and Fisher cases involved Stipulation of
Settlement agreements (piggyback agreements) made available to
taxpayers in the Plastics Recycling project, whereby taxpayers
could agree to be bound by the results of three test cases:
Provizer v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1992-177, and the two Miller
cases. We held in Estate of Satin and Fisher that the terms of
the piggyback agreement bound the parties to the results in all
three lead cases, not just the Provizer case. Petitioners assert
that the piggyback agreement was extended to them, but they do
not claim to have accepted the offer timely, so they effectively
rejected it.16
In or about February 1988, a settlement offer (the Plastics
Recycling project settlement offer or the offer) was made
available by respondent in all docketed Plastics Recycling cases
and subsequently, in all nondocketed cases. Baratelli v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1994-484. Pursuant to the offer,
taxpayers had 30 days to accept the following terms: (1)
16 In their motion for decision, petitioners state: "After the
lead counsel for taxpayers and Respondent had agreed upon the
designation of the lead cases, Respondent's counsel prepared
piggyback agreements and offered them to counsel for the
taxpayers in this case and to other taxpayers." (Emphasis added.)
Page: Previous 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011