- 8 -
prejudice towards petitioner and her counsel.4 Petitioner’s
Motion for Reconsideration was denied.
Thereafter, respondent on December 26, 2000, filed a Motion
to Dismiss on the ground that petitioner had failed to prosecute
her case. One of the alleged reasons relied upon by respondent
for seeking dismissal was that “Notwithstanding the many efforts
by respondent to secure cooperation from petitioner and/or her
counsel, petitioner has failed and refused in every respect to
cooperate to move this case toward resolution.” On January 3,
2001, petitioner moved for a fourth change of the place of trial
from Portland, Oregon to San Diego, California. Respondent
objected to petitioner’s motion and the matter was set for
hearing. After a telephone conference in which petitioner’s
counsel agreed to pursue the underlying merits of respondent’s
determination, the Court in a February 2, 2001, Order, continued
the case from the February 15, 2001, Portland, Oregon, trial
session and granted petitioner’s motion to change the place of
trial to San Diego, California.
On March 13, 2001, petitioner Moved to Stay Proceedings and
her motion was denied. Essentially, petitioner alleged that the
proceeding should be stayed until petitioner concludes her
4 In our Memorandum Opinion, Carpentier v. Commissioner,
T.C. Memo. 2000-258, the Court held that the matters deemed
admitted under Rules 37(c) and 90(c) established (1) the nature
and amounts of items of income that petitioner failed to report,
and (2) her liabilities for the additions to tax determined in
the notice of deficiency.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011