- 8 -
returns that conformed to the Schedules K-1. Petitioner did not
understand from the Schedules K-1 that DRD had a substantial
amount of business activity other than real estate.
F. Petitioners’ Lawsuit Against Trisch and DRD
Petitioners wrote letters to Trisch or Givens late in 1993
or early in 1994 to ask for copies of DRD’s Federal income tax
returns but they did not get them until after the years in issue.
On May 23, 1996, petitioners sued Trisch, Lashley, DRD, and
others.3 Petitioners asserted that petitioner and Trisch were
equal partners in DRD until 1995, and sought a termination of
DRD, an accounting of DRD’s assets, and a distribution to
petitioner of 50 percent of DRD’s assets. Petitioners first
learned the amounts of engineering income and deductions Trisch
and Lashley had received and reported when petitioners received
responses to their requests for discovery in their lawsuit
against Trisch.
II. OPINION
A. Whether Petitioner and Trisch Were Partners in DRD in the
Years in Issue
The parties agree that DRD was a partnership until 1989.
However, petitioners contend that petitioner and Trisch were not
3 Petitioners also sued Gary Broach and Ouida Broach, and
High Wilderness Land & Cattle Co., a Texas partnership. Ouida
Broach was an assistant for Lashley. Gary Broach was Ouida
Broach’s husband. Petitioner, Trisch, Lashley, and Gary Broach
were partners in High Wilderness Land & Cattle Co.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011