- 16 -
At trial, petitioner submitted several exhibits purporting
to substantiate some of petitioner corporation’s travel and
entertainment expenses and petitioner’s claim that he made cash
advances to petitioner corporation. They were not admitted into
evidence because they were not exchanged as required by our
pretrial orders.6 Materials not exchanged in compliance with our
pretrial orders may be excluded from evidence. Rule 104(c)(2);
Gleason v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1990-110; see Freedson v.
Commissioner, 565 F.2d 954 (5th Cir. 1978), affg. 65 T.C. 333
(1975) and 67 T.C. 931 (1977); McCoy v. Commissioner, 76 T.C.
1027 (1981), affd. 696 F.2d 1234 (9th Cir. 1983).
At trial, petitioner’s counsel said that prior counsel for
petitioner had told him that he submitted and withdrew for
reorganization “voluminous documentation” around July 15, 1994.
Respondent’s counsel remembered receiving no such documents from
petitioner. There is no corroboration of petitioner’s counsel’s
secondhand report that prior counsel gave records to respondent
in July 1994. Petitioners apparently accept respondent’s
counsel’s account because they have not pursued this point
further. Also, petitioner does not claim that he organized any
of these records and gave them to respondent before these cases
were tried.
6 Petitioner refrained from offering numerous documents into
evidence after we did not admit other exhibits that were not
exchanged before trial.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011