Kenneth & Linda J. Logie - Page 8

                                        - 8 -                                         

          their respective positions.  Rule 31(a).  It is well settled that           
          this Court ordinarily will not consider issues that have not been           
          pleaded.  See Estate of Mandels v. Commissioner, 64 T.C. 61, 73             
          (1975); Estate of Horvath v. Commissioner, 59 T.C. 551, 556                 
          (1973).  An issue is not properly raised unless the opposing                
          party is given fair notice and is not surprised or put at a                 
          substantial disadvantage.  Markwardt v. Commissioner, 64 T.C.               
          989, 997 (1975); Estate of Horvath v. Commissioner, supra at 555.           
               Refusal to consider an issue not raised in the pleadings is            
          particularly proper where the issue is a factual one and where              
          respondent is unaware of petitioners' position until trial.                 
          Estate of Mandels v. Commissioner, supra at 73.  In this case,              
          petitioners submitted new medical receipts to respondent the                
          morning of trial.  Respondent did not have an adequate                      
          opportunity to evaluate this new issue and petitioners' evidence            
          supporting it.  Petitioners' delay in raising this issue is                 
          prejudicial to respondent.  See Russo v. Commissioner, 98 T.C. 28           
          (1992); O'Rourke v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1990-161.                      
               Accordingly, petitioners' claim of additional medical                  
          expenses is not properly before the Court, and we decline to                
          consider it.4                                                               

               4  Moreover, even if the Court were to consider this issue,            
          the record is insufficient to establish that petitioners are                
          entitled to medical deductions in excess of those claimed on                
          their return.  At trial, petitioners introduced into evidence a             

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011