- 12 -
show such prejudice.”); cf. Kramer v. Commissioner, 89 T.C. at
1086.
Respondent contends that due to the then-impending trial
date respondent would be prejudiced if petitioners are allowed to
amend their reply. However, the instant case was stricken from
the then-impending trial session. Both sides will have an
adequate opportunity to do the necessary informal consultation
and, if appropriate, formal discovery before the instant case is
tried. We conclude that respondent will not be unduly prejudiced
by this Court’s allowing petitioners to amend their reply.
Accordingly, we conclude that petitioners will be allowed to
amend their reply to deny respondent’s affirmative allegations.
We hold for petitioners on this issue.
2. Rule 121--Summary Judgment
The parties appear to be essentially in agreement about the
application of collateral estoppel and summary judgment in light
of our conclusion that petitioners are to be permitted to amend
their reply, and so it is not necessary to discuss in detail the
operation of these doctrines.
Because of his conviction of criminal tax fraud under
section 7201 for each of the years 1988, 1989, and 1990, Anthony
is estopped to deny that he committed civil tax fraud for 1988
(within the meaning of sec. 6653(b)) and for 1989 and 1990
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011