Denson C. and Linda C. Brumley - Page 7

                                        - 7 -                                         

          business deductions in the event this Court should determine that           
          Ms. Brumley’s income was subject to self-employment tax.                    
               Rule 41(a) provides that a pleading may be amended once as a           
          matter of course at any time before a responsive pleading is                
          served, and, thereafter, amendment may be made by leave of the              
          Court or by written consent of the adverse party.  Prior to                 
          trial, petitioners had never requested leave of this Court to               
          amend their petition and did not raise this new issue until the             
          date set for trial of this case.  At this late date we will not             
          permit petitioners to amend their pleading.                                 
               This case is not one where an issue has been tried by                  
          express or implied consent of the parties, in which event we                
          treat the issue as if raised in the pleadings.  Rule 41(b).  This           
          case presents a situation in which respondent’s counsel was                 
          faced, on the date of trial, with trying an issue not known to              
          him.                                                                        
               Further, Mr. Tijerina has failed to comply with our Standing           
          Pre-Trial Order.  He did not meet with respondent to stipulate              
          facts and exhibits after service of our Standing Pre-Trial Order,           
          and has not submitted a trial memorandum.  When asked by the                
          Court why he failed to comply with the requirements of the                  
          Standing Pre-Trial Order, Mr. Tijerina offered no satisfactory              
          explanation.  Not only did he fail to raise the issue in a trial            
          memorandum so that the Court and respondent would be apprised of            





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011