- 6 - L. Winer (Mr. Winer). Clearwater was one of many Plastics Recycling partnerships in which Mr. Winer was the general partner. In this case, petitioner invested in RRA, and the general partner was Richard Roberts (Mr. Roberts). Like Mr. Winer, Mr. Roberts was the general partner in many Plastics Recycling partnerships.2 In Greene v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1997-296, the Court found that “The transactions involving the Sentinel EPE recyclers leased by * * * [RRA] are substantially identical to those in” Clearwater. Moreover, we have carefully examined the private offering memorandum in RRA and do not find that there is any meaningful difference between the structural facts of the partnership set out in the offering memorandum and the facts that this Court found in Provizer. On July 27, 1998, respondent filed a Motion for Entry of Decision. The gravamen of that motion is that petitioner is bound by the closing agreement. In opposition to respondent’s motion, petitioner alleges that (1) he was not afforded an 2 See, e.g., Ulanoff v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1999-170 (Plymouth Equipment Associates and Taylor Recycling Associates); Merino v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1997-385 (Northeast Resource Recovery Associates), affd. 196 F.3d 147 (3d Cir. 1999); Sann v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1997-259, affd. sub nom. Addington v. Commissioner, 205 F.3d 54 (2d Cir. 2000) (Empire Associates, Plymouth Equipment Associates, and Foam Recycling Associates); Zenkel v. Commissioner, T.C Memo. 1996-398 (Phoenix Recycling Group and Scarborough Leasing Associates (where Mr. Winer was also a general partner)); Stone v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1996- 230 (Northeast Resource Recovery Associates and Hyannis Recycling Associates); Pace v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1995-580 (Hyannis Recycling Associates).Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011