Thomas Corson and Judith Corson - Page 20




                                       - 20 -                                         
          taking into account all relevant evidence.  After all, easing the           
          standards for obtaining relief is not equivalent to giving relief           
          where unwarranted.                                                          
               While we do not have before us a case for determining the              
          precise contours of the rights granted to a nonelecting spouse              
          under section 6015(e), we are satisfied that section 6015(e)(4)             
          was intended to confer some participatory entitlement beyond the            
          complete absence thereof condoned in Estate of Ravetti v. United            
          States, supra, Garvey v. Commissioner, supra, and Himmelwright v.           
          Commissioner, supra.  Thus, until such rights are more explicitly           
          defined in appropriate cases, we will refrain from following a              
          rule that could lead to an anomaly in the Court’s treatment of              
          innocent spouse issues.  We will instead effectuate the general             
          concern for fairness and merited relief evidenced in the statute            
          by permitting Thomas his day in court.  We further note that our            
          disposition makes it unnecessary to reach Thomas’s alternative              
          contention.                                                                 
               To reflect the foregoing,                                              


                                             An order denying respondent’s            
                                        motion will be issued.                        











Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  

Last modified: May 25, 2011