Joseph F. and Camille T. Uddo - Page 3

                                                                                - 3 -- 3 -                                                                                 
                    filed their petition with this Court on August 8, 1997.  At the                                                                                        
                    time their petition was filed, petitioners resided in New                                                                                              
                    Orleans, Louisiana.                                                                                                                                    
                              Respondent filed an answer on September 11, 1997.  Shortly                                                                                   
                    thereafter, the case file was forwarded to respondent's Appeals                                                                                        
                    Office in New Orleans, Louisiana, where the case was assigned to                                                                                       
                    Appeals Officer Gregory M. Berry (Mr. Berry).  The administrative                                                                                      
                    file received by Mr. Berry bore no indication that petitioners                                                                                         
                    had provided respondent with any information or response to the                                                                                        
                    30-day letter.                                                                                                                                         
                              On September 15, 1997, Mr. Neilson wrote to Mary Beth                                                                                        
                    Calkins at respondent's District Counsel office in New Orleans.                                                                                        
                    Mr. Neilson asserted that the disputed amount of $156,931 was a                                                                                        
                    "direct rollover" by petitioners from American Express to an IRA                                                                                       
                    with Southwest Securities, Inc. (Southwest).  Attached to the                                                                                          
                    letter were copies of documents purporting to support                                                                                                  
                    petitioners' position, including an application by Mr. Uddo for                                                                                        
                    an IRA with Southwest, a letter requesting a transfer of Mr.                                                                                           
                    Uddo's accounts with IDS (American Express), and "portfolio                                                                                            
                    summary" statements from Southwest.                                                                                                                    
                              In a letter dated September 18, 1997, Mr. Berry wrote to                                                                                     
                    acknowledge respondent's receipt of Mr. Neilson's September 15,                                                                                        
                    1997, letter and the supporting documentation.  Mr. Berry stated                                                                                       
                    that from his review of the supporting documentation he was                                                                                            
                    unable to tie the information to the disputed amount and                                                                                               




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011