- 22 -
counsel directed Ms. Kish's attention to the latter.
Nevertheless, Ms. Kish took no action, and instead transmitted
the file, presumably including the foregoing documents, to
respondent's District Counsel office for preparation of the
answer.
When respondent filed the answer in July 1996, respondent
should have been aware of all of the infirmities, as previously
described, that were evident on the face of the Forms 1099-G.
Respondent should also have been aware of petitioner's position
that the Forms 1099-G related to a single debt that had been
discharged by the bankruptcy court in September 1986. Indeed,
respondent's administrative file should have included the
operative documents related to petitioner's bankruptcy case.
Nevertheless, respondent denied all of the substantive
allegations made in the petition and thereby permitted this case
to proceed.
Finally, we observe that respondent did not concede this
case until after petitioner's counsel furnished the FDIC
communication dated August 9, 1996. Although the FDIC
communication did confirm the existence of indebtedness owed by
petitioner to Moncor Bank, the FDIC continued to maintain that
indebtedness in the amount of $251,203.73 was discharged in 1993.
We question, therefore, whether the FDIC communication was
actually the definitive piece of evidence that "allowed"
respondent to concede.
Page: Previous 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011