- 12 -
We also note that petitioner has failed to prosecute
properly its case.1 Petitioner failed to file a brief, as
ordered by the Court and required by Rule 151, and it has failed
to explain its failure to do so. We have previously treated such
inaction by a party as an abandonment of those issues not
addressed. See Calcutt v. Commissioner, 84 T.C. 716, 721 (1985).
We also have held that the failure to file a brief may justify
the dismissal of all issues as to which a taxpayer has the burden
of proof. See Stringer v. Commissioner, 84 T.C. 693, 708 (1985),
affd. without published opinion 789 F.2d 917 (4th Cir. 1986).
We sustain respondent's determination.
Decision will be entered
for respondent.
1 Petitioner's representative, Mr. Tully, is no stranger to
litigation. He has filed cases in this Court on at least 3 prior
occasions, see Tully v. Commissioner, Order of this Court dated
Jan. 8, 1998, dismissing the case for failure to prosecute,
vacated and remanded with unpublished opinion 164 F.3d 631 (9th
Cir. 1998), with instructions to dismiss petition for lack of
jurisdiction; Tully v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1997-310, on
appeal (9th Cir., July 29, 1997); Oliver Family Found. v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1997-220, he has or is prosecuting the
appeal of two of these cases before the Court of Appeals for the
Ninth Circuit, and he prosecuted one case before a California
district court, see Tully v. Kaply, 81 A.F.T.R.2d 98-2125 (C.D.
Cal. 1998).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Last modified: May 25, 2011