Estate of Arthur G. Scanlan, Deceased, Ruth B. Scanlan, Administratrix - Page 4

                                           - 4 -                                             
          an opinion.  Reconsideration is not the appropriate forum for                      
          rehashing previously rejected arguments or tendering new legal                     
          theories to reach the end desired by the moving party.  The Court                  
          tries all issues raised in a case in one proceeding to promote                     
          orderly litigation and to further judicial economy by                              
          discouraging piecemeal and protracted litigation.  CWT Farms,                      
          Inc. v. Commissioner, supra at 1057; Stoody v. Commissioner,                       
          67 T.C. 643 (1977); see also Estate of Trenchard  v.                               
          Commissioner, supra.                                                               
                Petitioner's motion and memorandum do not list (or otherwise                 
          show) any unusual circumstance or substantial error with respect                   
          to our memorandum opinion.  Thus, petitioner is not within the                     
          general rules for reconsideration of an opinion.  Petitioner has                   
          also not persuaded us that this case requires us to depart from                    
          these general rules.  In its trial brief, petitioner primarily                     
          argued that the Court should accept the values set forth by its                    
          expert, Mr. Chaffe.  Petitioner also argued that the Mandelbaum                    
          factors confirmed that the 35-percent marketability discount used                  
          by Mr. Chaffe in ascertaining his value was not excessive.                         
                For the reasons stated in Estate of Trenchard v.                             
          Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1995-121, we disagreed with all of                        
          petitioner's arguments.  Petitioner now asks us to reconsider our                  
          memorandum opinion in Estate of Scanlan v. Commissioner, T.C.                      
          Memo. 1996-331 and rewrite it to conform to Mr. Chaffe's                           
          conclusion on value.  We decline to do so.  Petitioner has not                     




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011