- 8 - respondent requested that petitioner determine how she wanted to resolve this case. In a subsequent conversation with respondent, petitioner indicated that she had received the letter. In another conversation, petitioner notified respondent that she would not sign a proposed decision document to resolve this case and that she did not plan to attend the calendar call in Los Angeles, California. Based on this information, respondent informed petitioner that respondent planned to file, at the calendar call in Los Angeles, California, a Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Prosecution with regard to petitioner. Shortly before the case was called for trial, respondent filed with the Court a Motion for Leave to File Amendment to Answer and lodged the Amendment to Answer. The Court granted respondent's Motion for Leave to File Amendment to Answer. In the Amendment to Answer, respondent notified the Court of the clerical error in the notice of deficiency. The Amendment to Answer also stated that the deficiency asserted for the tax year 1982 was in the amount of $29,913. The original deficiency for the 1982 tax year was $38,782; however, the settlement of the Kelsey/Soda Lake Mining tax shelter issue reduced the 1982 deficiency to $29,913. When this case was called for trial in Los Angeles, California, petitioner did not appear. At the calendar call, respondent filed with the Court, on behalf of petitioner Dennis P. Raquet, a Stipulation of Settlement between RespondentPage: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011