- 16 -
strike); see also Yamaha Motor Corp. v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo.
1992-110. With regard to whether respondent may abuse the
discovery process, we believe that our Rules provide adequate
means to address any such eventuality.
C. Conclusion
We are not deciding at this time that additional individuals
were employees of petitioner or that petitioner is liable for
additional employment taxes. We conclude, however, that
respondent should have the opportunity to present these
allegations to the Court as the questions raised by the
allegations are better left for a determination on the merits.
Estate of Jephson v. Commissioner, supra at 1003.
Paragraphs 9 and 10 of the Answer to the Second Amended
Petition are not redundant, immaterial, impertinent, frivolous,
or scandalous. Accordingly, petitioner’s motion to strike is
denied.
In reaching all of our holdings herein, we have considered
all arguments made by the parties, and to the extent not
mentioned above, we find them to be irrelevant or without merit.
To reflect the foregoing,
An appropriate order will
be issued.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Last modified: May 25, 2011