- 4 -
By notice dated October 25, 2000, the Court set this case
for trial at the Court’s Cleveland, Ohio, session beginning March
26, 2001. This notice specifically stated: “YOUR FAILURE TO
APPEAR MAY RESULT IN DISMISSAL OF THE CASE AND ENTRY OF DECISION
AGAINST YOU.” Although our standing pretrial order required
petitioner to submit a trial memorandum, he never did so.
On March 26, 2001, this case was called at the Court’s trial
calendar in Cleveland, Ohio. Petitioner did not appear. At that
time, respondent orally moved to dismiss for failure to prosecute
pursuant to Rule 123(b).
On March 27, 2001, the case was recalled, and respondent
filed a written motion to dismiss for lack of prosecution
pursuant to Rule 123(b). At that time, the Court held a hearing
regarding the motion to dismiss. Petitioner did not appear at
the hearing.
Discussion
I. Rule 123(b). Dismissal
The Court may dismiss a case and enter a decision against a
taxpayer for his failure properly to prosecute or to comply with
the Rules of this Court. Rule 123(b). Rule 123(b) generally
applies in situations where the taxpayer bears the burden of
proof.
II. Section 7491. Burden of Proof and Burden of Production
When this case was called for trial, respondent represented
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011