- 5 -
A hearing was held in this case in Washington, D.C., on
March 20, 1996. Counsel for respondent appeared at the hearing
and presented argument on the pending motions. Petitioner did
not appear at the hearing, nor did petitioner file a statement
with the Court pursuant to Rule 50(c).2
Discussion
Rule 40 provides that a party may file a motion to dismiss
for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
We may grant such a motion when it appears beyond doubt that the
party's adversary can prove no set of facts in support of a claim
which would entitle him or her to relief. Conley v. Gibson, 355
U.S. 41, 45-46 (1957); Price v. Moody, 677 F.2d 676, 677 (8th
Cir. 1982).
Rule 34(b)(4) requires that a petition filed in this Court
contain clear and concise assignments of each and every error
which the taxpayer alleges to have been committed by the
Commissioner in the determination of the deficiencies and the
additions to tax in dispute. Rule 34(b)(5) further requires that
the petition contain clear and concise lettered statements of the
facts on which the taxpayer bases the assignments of error. See
Jarvis v. Commissioner, 78 T.C. 646, 658 (1982). The failure of
2 In its Order dated Feb. 20, 1996, the Court reminded the
parties of the applicability of Rule 50(c), which provides for
the submission of a written statement in lieu of, or in addition
to, attendance at the hearing.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011