- 7 - d. Petitioner received rents from the real estate managed by Charles Dunn Company for 1989 through 1993 in the respective amounts of $75,000.00, $75,000.00, $81,115.89, $75,891.62 and $77,910.94. e. Petitioner received rents from the real estate in amounts greater than determined in the notices of deficiency issued to the petitioner, in the respective amounts of $34,800.00, $34,800.00, $40,915.89, $35,691.62 and $37,710.94. f. Because of concessions by respondent with regard to the capital gains income received by petitioner in the years in question, the increased income will not result in deficiencies greater than the amounts determined by respondent in the notices of deficiency. Petitioner failed to file a reply to respondent's Amendment to Answer. On December 13, 1999, respondent filed a motion pursuant to Rule 37(c) requesting that all undenied allegations set forth in respondent's Amendment to Answer be deemed admitted. Although petitioner was notified of respondent's motion, petitioner failed to file either a response to the motion or a reply to respondent's Amendment to Answer. On January 10, 2000, the Court granted respondent's Rule 37(c) motion. On February 1, 2000, Mr. Peabody filed a motion to withdraw from the case, citing petitioner's failure to communicate with him. The Court granted Mr. Peabody's motion on March 3, 2000. Prior thereto, on February 24, 2000, Douglas D. Potratz filed an entry of appearance on behalf of petitioner. Mr. Potratz is petitioner’s current counsel.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011