- 9 -
Matthias & Berg’s files do not indicate whether they had sent
petitioner any notice that they filed the 1988 petition, or
contain a copy of the notice of deficiency for 1980 addressed to
petitioner.
Berg filed a motion to withdraw as counsel in docket No.
22961-88 on November 12, 1998. There was an Order to Show Cause
hearing on November 17, 1998. Berg’s motion to withdraw was
granted on November 17, 1998.5 Petitioner first learned that
petitions had been filed for him in two cases during the Order to
Show Cause hearing on November 17, 1998. At the hearing,
petitioner contended that we lacked jurisdiction because he had
not authorized a petition to be filed and asked for a hearing on
that issue. On November 17, 1998, petitioner signed a
stipulation of settled issues on all issues for docket No. 22961-
88 except whether we have jurisdiction as to him.
OPINION
A. Whether the Tax Court Lacks Jurisdiction Because Petitioner
Did Not Authorize or Ratify the Filing of the Petition
Respondent contends that the Tax Court has jurisdiction over
petitioner in docket No. 22961-88 because he authorized or
ratified the filing of his petition. We disagree.
Berg signed the petition for petitioner and Rothhammer for
their 1980 tax year. The appearance of an attorney on behalf of
5 Berg’s motion to withdraw as counsel in docket No. 32146-
86, was filed on Jan. 24, 1989, and granted on Jan. 26, 1989.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011