- 12 -
notice of deficiency for 1980 to Robb and suggested that they
consider filing a petition. On June 20, 1988, Covalt wrote a
letter to Zobrist (with a copy to Rothhammer) stating that
respondent had sent a notice of deficiency for 1980 to Rothhammer
and petitioner and to ask Zobrist to contact Rothhammer. Robb
spoke to Morton at Matthias & Berg on August 31, 1988, 2 days
after Matthias & Berg mailed the petition.
Respondent points out that petitioner authorized Covalt and
Robb to represent him before the IRS. However, neither Covalt
nor Robb authorized or ratified the filing of the petition in
docket No. 22961-88.
Respondent contends that petitioner authorized the general
partners in the Manhattan group to retain Matthias & Berg to file
the 1980 petition for petitioner. We disagree. There is no
evidence to support that theory, and petitioner credibly
testified that he did not authorize anyone to file the 1980
petition for him.
Respondent contends that these cases are like Morgan v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1990-338. We disagree. The taxpayer in
Morgan learned about the notice of deficiency and petition after
her attorney mailed it but before the petition was filed. The
taxpayer took no action to stop or repudiate the filing. Here,
petitioner objected to our jurisdiction over docket No. 22961-88
when he first realized that a second petition had been filed.
We conclude that petitioner did not file, authorize anyone
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011