- 5 -
(z) A part of each deficiency in income tax for
the taxable years 1985, 1986 and 1987, is due to fraud
with intent to evade taxes.
By notice dated October 10, 1996, the Court set this case
for trial at the Columbus, Ohio, trial session beginning on
March 17, 1997. This notice specifically stated that "YOUR
FAILURE TO APPEAR MAY RESULT IN DISMISSAL OF THE CASE AND ENTRY
OF DECISION AGAINST YOU."
On November 7, 1996, petitioner's counsel filed a motion to
withdraw their representation of petitioner. That motion recites
that "Petitioner has instructed counsel not to sign the Decision
Entry previously agreed to between Petitioner and District
Counsel."
This case was called at the Court's trial session in
Columbus, Ohio, on March 17, 1997. Petitioner did not appear,
file a pretrial memorandum, or request a continuance. At that
time, respondent filed the motion for judgment by default
pursuant to the provisions of Rule 123(a).
Discussion
Rule 123(a) provides that if any party fails to plead or
otherwise proceed as provided by the Rules or as required by the
Court, that party may be held in default on the motion of the
other party. Smith v. Commissioner, 91 T.C. 1049, 1056 (1988),
affd. 926 F.2d 1470 (6th Cir. 1991). The action or nonaction on
the part of a taxpayer that constitutes sufficient grounds to
apply Rule 123(a) in proceedings before us is a matter within
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011