- 5 -
addresses the relevant issues as designated in the
parties' Trial Memorandums and in particular as set
forth by William T. Conklin, Pages 19-34 of Exhibit
7-J.
At the calendar call, the Court gave petitioner copies of
opinions in four cases to read before trial, which was set for
the afternoon of the same day, to "demonstrate to you the error
of your ways * * * that the position that you are taking as set
forth in your trial memorandum is not going to prevail".1 The
Court suggested that, rather than pursuing frivolous arguments,
petitioner should attempt to present evidence of deductible
expenses that might reduce the deficiencies and additions.
When the case was recalled in the afternoon, respondent's
counsel reported that a basis of settlement had not been reached
and handed up a bare-bones stipulation of facts. Petitioner had
refused to stipulate that he had not filed Federal income tax
returns for the years in question or the amounts of compensation
he had received. Petitioner's refusal to stipulate led to a
trial on these issues, with the introduction of documentary
evidence to support respondent's determinations that petitioner
had not filed income tax returns and the testimony of four
witnesses (petitioner's two employers and their respective
1 Coleman v. Commissioner, 791 F.2d 68 (7th Cir. 1986);
Ghalardi Income Tax Educ. Found. v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo.
1998-460; Liddane v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1998-259; Talmage
v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1996-114, affd. without published
opinion 101 F.3d 695 (4th Cir. 1996).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011