- 12 -
Coordinated Pretrial Proceedings in Antibiotic
Antitrust Actions, 538 F.2d 180, 195 (8th Cir. 1974);
citations omitted).]
See also Browning v. Navarro, 826 F.2d 335, 345 (5th Cir. 1987).
As suggested, the evidence and allegations that petitioners
offer in support of their allegations of a fraud upon the Court
are extremely vague and unsupported, and they call for little
further discussion. We note that petitioners’ counsel herein and
petitioners’ prior counsel represented many taxpayers who were
involved in the Elektra Hemisphere tax shelters, and petitioners'
former and/or present counsel likely have been aware, for many
years, of all settlement positions that were made available by
respondent.
Assuming, arguendo, that respondent’s counsel -- in 1994 and
later years after the Krause v. Commissioner, 99 T.C. 132 (1992),
test case opinion was rendered -- did not specifically inform
petitioners’ counsel of all prior settlement positions that were
available to investors in the Elektra Hemisphere tax shelters,
there would be no basis for finding that a fraud has occurred on
the Court. As explained above, TEFRA settlement procedures do
not apply to these cases involving pre-TEFRA years, and there
existed no obligation on respondent’s counsel in these cases to
inform all petitioners of each and every settlement position
available to investors.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011