- 29 - On the basis of Sullivan--a decision that did not announce a new rule of law--respondent argued in his reply brief that the United Ready Mixed settlement proceeds should be taxed as income to petitioner in 1992.14 Respondent also argues that “Petitioner is not harmed by respondent’s change in position as respondent’s new position is consistent with petitioner’s own treatment of the proceeds on his 1992 return”. We disagree with respondent’s statement. Petitioner may have relied on respondent’s trial and briefing concession in failing to introduce evidence and submit argument to support a deduction for amounts paid to his attorney and placed in trust in 1992 pending resolution of the attorney’s-fee dispute. Respondent’s change of position after trial created new legal and factual issues; petitioner did not have an opportunity to introduce evidence on these new issues because respondent did not change his position until after the trial was completed. We have refused to allow the Commissioner to withdraw factual concessions after trial where there would be prejudice to the opposing party. See Glass v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1988-550 (“In his brief, respondent seeks to withdraw the concession. We are not inclined to accept such withdrawal, 14In his reply brief, respondent states: “In light of Sullivan, respondent hereby changes the position taken in his opening brief, and asserts that petitioner received taxable Ready Mixed settlement proceeds in the amount of $797,225.00 in 1992, the year such proceeds were deposited into Lurie and Zepeda’s client trust fund.”Page: Previous 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011