- 91 -
On March 9, 1988, Mr. Kersting issued a letter to program
participants characterizing Chicoine and Hallett as "scoundrels",
and stating that he had fired them and retained Mr. Izen to
represent the test cases (excluding the Thompsons and the
Cravenses).
By letter dated April 22, 1988, Mr. Chicoine notified
Kersting program participants that the Court had ruled in the
Government's favor in Dixon I; he restated his support for the
20-percent settlement offer described in his February 9, 1988,
letter and revealed that, because of a disagreement with
Mr. Kersting, Chicoine and Hallett would withdraw as counsel for
the test cases.43
Mr. Kersting later carried out his threat to sue Chicoine
and Hallett for legal malpractice. Mr. Izen served as an expert
witness for Mr. Kersting in his lawsuit against Chicoine and
Hallett.
By letter dated April 8, 1988, Mr. McWade notified
Mr. DeCastro that, after June 15, 1988, respondent would no
43 Coincidentally, on Apr. 20, 1988, Mr. DeCastro wrote a
letter to a client, James Losey, expressing similar sentiments in
favor of settlement of the Kersting cases. After outlining the
deadlines that Mr. McWade had set for the acceptance of
outstanding settlement offers, Mr. DeCastro's letter states in
pertinent part:
There is now an urgent need for your friends and
acquaintances to consult their legal counsel and
seriously consider settling their case with the IRS.
The evidence continues to build against the taxpayers
in these cases and despite Mr. Kersting's assurances,
we feel the trial will be won by the IRS. The result
would be very serious for the taxpayers.
Page: Previous 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011