- 21 -
3. Respondent’s Arguments
Respondent’s argument is the same in each of the motions.
In docket No. 9820-99, respondent states:
Petitioner’s amended petition fails to meet these
requirements [Rule 34(b)] and in fact states that
“petitioner brings only an issue of law before the
court.” * * * Tax Court Rule 34(b)(4) states that
“Any issue not raised in the assignments of error shall
be deemed to be conceded."
Respondent then summarizes the amended petition and states that
petitioner has failed to comply with Rule 34(b) by, in effect,
failing to assign any error to respondent’s determinations of
deficiencies. For that reason, respondent argues, the motion
should be granted:
[The amended petition] * * * merely sets forth
frivolous legal positions which are contrary to
established law and unsupported by a reasoned,
colorable argument for change in the law. Petitioner’s
amended petition fails to present any specific
allegations of error, any meritorious reasons for
disagreeing with the notice of deficiency, nor any
facts in support of any such disagreement. * * *
* * * * * * *
Because petitioner’s amended petition merely sets forth
frivolous arguments and as such does not allege any
justiciable error with respect to the notice of
deficiency, respondent should be granted judgment in
his favor based upon the pleadings. [Citations
omitted.]
4. Burden of Proof
A judgment on the pleadings is a judgment based solely on
the allegations and information contained in the pleadings and
not on any outside matters. See Rule 120(a) and (b); see also
Page: Previous 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011