Michael H. Johnson and Patricia E. Johnson - Page 4




                                        - 4 -                                         
          a taxpayer is not required to offer any evidence of net worth               
          when the Commissioner objects to the taxpayer's affidavit and net           
          worth schedule.  Petitioners also suggest that an evidentiary               
          hearing is required.                                                        
               Reconsideration under Rule 161 permits us to correct                   
          manifest errors of fact or law, or to allow newly discovered                
          evidence to be introduced that could not have been introduced               
          before the filing of an opinion, even if the moving party had               
          exercised due diligence.  See Rothwell Cotton Co. v. Rosenthal &            
          Co., 827 F.2d 246, 251, amended per order 835 F.2d 710 (7th Cir.            
          1987); see also Traum v. Commissioner, 237 F.2d 277, 281 (7th               
          Cir. 1956), affg. T.C. Memo. 1955-127.  The granting of a motion            
          for reconsideration rests within the discretion of the Court, and           
          we shall not grant a motion for reconsideration unless the party            
          seeking reconsideration shows unusual circumstances or                      
          substantial error.  See Alexander v. Commissioner, 95 T.C. 467,             
          469 (1990), affd. sub nom. without published opinion Stell v.               
          Commissioner, 999 F.2d 544 (9th Cir. 1993); Estate of Halas v.              
          Commissioner, 94 T.C. 570, 573 (1990); Vaughn v. Commissioner, 87           
          T.C. 164, 166-167 (1986); Estate of Bailly v. Commissioner, 81              
          T.C. 949, 951 (1983); Haft Trust v. Commissioner, 62 T.C. 145,              
          147 (1974), affd. on this issue 510 F.2d 43, 45 n.1 (1st Cir.               
          1975).  Reconsideration is not the appropriate forum for                    
          rehashing previously rejected legal arguments or tendering new              






Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011