- 3 -
Ps argue (under various theories) that the Court's
decisions in the remaining test cases should not be
reinstated, or, in the alternative, that the piggyback
agreements are not enforceable. R counters that the
decisions in the remaining test cases should be
reinstated on the ground that Ps were not prejudiced by
the Government misconduct in the trial of the test
cases and that the piggyback agreements remain in
force.
Held: The Government misconduct in the trial of
the test cases did not result in a structural defect in
the trial. Held further: The Government misconduct in
the trial of the test cases resulted in harmless error.
Held further: The Government misconduct in the trial
of the test cases does not provide any other basis for
invalidating the Court's decisions in the remaining
test cases or for setting aside the piggyback
agreements. Held further: As a sanction against R,
program participants who have not been the subject of a
final determination are not liable for time-sensitive
additions to tax for negligence under secs. 6653(a)(2)
and 6653(a)(1)(B), I.R.C., or increased interest under
sec. 6621(c), I.R.C.
Joe Alfred Izen, Jr., counsel for petitioners in docket Nos.
9382-83, 4201-84, 15907-84, 40159-84, 22783-85, 30010-85, 30979-
85, 29643-86, and 35608-86.
Robert Alan Jones, counsel for petitioners in docket Nos.
17646-83, 19464-92, 621-94, and 9532-94.
Robert Patrick Sticht, counsel for petitioners in docket
Nos. 7323-84, 20119-84, 7205-94, 17992-95, and 17993-95.
Mary Elizabeth Wynne, Steven A. Wilson, Andrew J. Gottlieb,
Milton J. Carter, Jr., Robert E. Casey, and Richard S. Goldstein,
for respondent.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011