Barry L. Moore - Page 9




                                        - 9 -                                         
          and levy notices described above.                                           
               On November 14, 2000, petitioner filed with the Court a                
          petition for review of respondent's determination to proceed with           
          collection.  The petition lists petitioner’s address as the                 
          DalRich Village address in Richardson, Texas.  The petition                 
          includes allegations that petitioner is not liable for the                  
          underlying taxes due to the expiration of the period of                     
          limitations for assessment and collection.  Respondent filed an             
          answer to the petition.                                                     
               C.  Respondent’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment                   
               On June 1, 2001, respondent filed a Motion for Partial                 
          Summary Judgment asserting that petitioner received the notices             
          of deficiency for 1987 and 1989 through 1995 and, therefore, that           
          petitioner is precluded by statute from contesting his liability            
          for the underlying taxes for those years in this proceeding.                
          Respondent’s motion, which was supported by attached exhibits A             
          through J (the notices of deficiency issued to petitioner and               
          petitioner’s and Mr. Kotmair’s written responses thereto) was               
          duly served on petitioner’s counsel.  On June 4, 2001, the Court            
          issued a Notice of Filing, directing petitioner to file an                  
          objection, if any, to respondent’s motion by June 25, 2001.                 
              On June 22, 2001, petitioner filed an objection to                     
          respondent's motion citing Rule 121(e) and stating that                     
          petitioner was unable to admit or deny the allegations in                   







Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011