- 13 -
Noonan's hands, which, in view of their animosity toward each
other, would not have been a reasonable thing to do. Mr. Pearson
was no longer at the law firm, and payment to the law firm would
not be reasonable, inasmuch as the original 1988 tax return was
no longer at the law firm. Petitioner had to deal with Mrs.
Noonan. He wrote to her, advised that he was ready and able to
pay the tax (which he was), and requested the return.
Apparently, she first stated she could not find it and then
refused to turn it over. Under these circumstances, petitioner
complied with the terms of the indemnification agreement. His
tender (offer to pay the tax) was unreasonably rejected, and,
therefore, the condition precedent has been satisfied.
Accordingly, we need not consider whether to attribute to
Mrs. Noonan an intent to file jointly based upon the inclusion of
her share of community income in the return submitted by
petitioner, where de minimis community income may have been
included in the return. See Januschke v. Commissioner, 48 T.C.
496 (1967); Heim v. Commissioner, 27 T.C. 270 (1956), affd. 251
F.2d 44 (8th Cir. 1958).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011