Glen L. Wittstadt, Jr. and Lynne M. Wittstadt - Page 9

                                        - 9 -                                          
               stipulate, respondent's counsel seems to be saying that                 
               there are a couple of areas of factual matters that are                 
               in dispute.                                                             
                           *   *   *   *   *   *   *                                  
                    What would you like to do with this case?                          
                    PETITIONER:  In other words, we can't do it by                     
                    THE COURT:  It sure doesn't look like it.  I think                 
               you understand why, that there are matters here in                      
               dispute and respondent is saying there are matters in                   
               dispute.  You don't seem to be disagreeing with that,                   
               that there are some matters which require some                          
                    If that is the case, it's clear that the Court                     
               cannot rule in your favor on the summary judgment                       
               motion.  You can't get a dispositive answer, which is                   
               what you want.  So the next step is trial.                              
               D. Entry of Appearance by Petitioners' Counsel                          
               On July 18, 1994, petitioners' counsel entered his                      
          appearance in this case.  On the following day, petitioners, by              
          counsel, commenced formal discovery against respondent by serving            
          a request for production of documents.                                       
               E. The Hylton Case                                                      
               On January 23, 1995, the Court filed its memorandum opinion             
          in Hylton v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1995-27.  That case, which             
          was decided after a trial at which a representative of the                   
          Maryland State Retirement Agency testified and 30 exhibits were              
          offered into evidence,6 presented facts strikingly similar to                
          those involved in the present case.  Thus, in Hylton, the                    

               6    The parties stipulated 10 exhibits; the remaining 20               
          exhibits were offered during the course of the trial, most of                
          which were received into evidence.                                           

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011