- 5 -
continuance because he was not ready for trial. Respondent
orally moved to dismiss the case for lack of prosecution because
petitioners had failed to cooperate in the preparation of the
pretrial stipulation of facts. The Court directed Mr. Nunn to
meet with respondent to present and organize his documents or
risk dismissal of the case.
The Court took both motions under advisement and ordered
petitioners to produce to respondent all documents relevant to
the case by November 15, 2000. On or about November 15, 2000,
Mr. Nunn presented respondent with copies of the same unorganized
documents presented at calendar call. The documents were not
separated according to the Schedules C to which they purportedly
related and were not labeled as to specific items reported on the
tax return.
Respondent scheduled further meetings to discuss the
documents with petitioners and their representative on December
13, 2000, and January 4, 2001. Neither petitioners nor their
representative was able to attend either meeting. On January 4,
2001, respondent sent petitioners a letter requesting a third
meeting.
Mr. Nunn and his representative met with respondent on
January 11, 2001. At the meeting, neither Mr. Nunn nor his
representative was prepared to organize the documents according
to the corresponding Schedules C. Additionally, Mr. Nunn claimed
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011