- 21 -
subpoena, or as otherwise required by law. Neither the DOJ nor
the IRS (which was not a party to the case) was ordered by the
District Court to make any notifications regarding any of the
matters in the Permanent Injunction.
Winer's explanation for failing to communicate with the
limited partners immediately after the Permanent Injunction was
entered is that Fieldstone's receipt of a copy of the Permanent
Injunction signed by the District Court judge was delayed. On or
about July 7, 1986, Winer filed an affidavit with the District
Court, dated May 23, 1986, which indicated that he had sent the
letters to the limited partners as specified in exhibit A of the
Permanent Injunction.
Winer's letter of resignation to the partners stated in
part:
As also required by the Consent, the undersigned
[Winer] hereby tenders his resignation as the tax
matters partner of the partnership in which you are a
limited partner. The undersigned [Winer] has also
personally waived his right to intervene in any court
proceeding as tax matters partner on behalf of this and
any other similarly situated partnership. The new tax
matters partner of your partnership is ______, whose
address is _____, Telephone number ______. Mr. ____,
was appointed pursuant to section 6231(a)(7) of the
Internal Revenue Code.
The letter instructed each addressee to consult an attached list
of limited partners to determine who had been selected as the new
TMP for his or her partnership. However, no separate letters
were sent to the individuals or entities who had been selected to
replace Winer as the TMP of each partnership. Winer testified
Page: Previous 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011