- 156 -
portions relating specifically and expressly to the
Cravenses or the Thompsons), and the Court's findings,
analyses, and conclusions relating to petitioner Rina
would remain the same. * * *
G. Attempted Discovery by Counsel for Nontest Case Petitioners
By letters dated June 24 and August 12, 1992, Messrs. Jones
and O'Donnell jointly requested that Mr. Dombrowski provide
informal discovery regarding the Thompson and Cravens
settlements. The earlier of the two letters included allegations
that Mr. Kersting withheld documents from the test case
petitioners that would have described "an underlying business of
great substance" because Mr. Kersting feared that the information
would increase his personal tax liability. Respondent declined
to respond to the informal discovery requests and did not allow
Messrs. Jones and O'Donnell to participate in any of the in-house
investigations conducted by Messrs. Bakutes, Dombrowski, Kane,
and Miller.
H. Closing of Thompson Cases/Further Refunds
In July 1992, Mr. DeCastro filed a motion for entry of
decision in accordance with the terms of the Thompson settlement
set forth in Mr. DeCastro's letter to Mr. McWade dated August 3,
1989; i.e., deficiencies of zero, $15,000, and $15,000 for the
taxable years 1979, 1980, and 1981, respectively. On August 20,
1992, respondent filed objections, with respondent's Motions for
Entry of Decision and respondent's Memoranda of Points and
Authorities, to Mr. DeCastro's motion for entry of decision.
Respondent's Motions for Entry of Decision described the facts
Page: Previous 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011