Richards Asset Management Trust, et al. - Page 8




                                        - 8 -                                         
          the trial in these cases, which the Court denied on October 2,              
          2001.                                                                       
               On October 15, 2001, these cases were called from the                  
          Court’s trial calendar at the Court’s trial session in Cleveland,           
          Ohio (Cleveland trial session).  At that calendar call, there was           
          no appearance by or on behalf of Richards Management Trust, Mr.             
          Richards, and Richards Charitable Trust.  At that time, respon-             
          dent orally moved to dismiss each of these cases for failure to             
          prosecute, and respondent requested, and the Court held, a trial            
          because, according to respondent, respondent has the burden of              
          production pursuant to section 7491(c) with respect to (1) the              
          accuracy-related penalties under section 6662(a) for 1996 and               
          1997 that respondent determined against Richards Management                 
          Trust, (2) the respective accuracy-related penalties under                  
          section 6662(a) for 1996 and 1997 that respondent determined                
          against Mr. Richards, and (3) the additions to tax under section            
          6651(a)(1) for 1996 and 1997 that respondent determined against             
          Richards Charitable Trust.  At the trial in these cases on                  
          October 15, 2001, there was no appearance by or on behalf of                
          Richards Management Trust, Mr. Richards, and Richards Charitable            
          Trust.                                                                      
               On November 13, 2001, respondent filed a written motion to             
          hold petitioner in default in each of the cases at docket Nos.              
          10764-00 and 10767-00 and a written motion to dismiss for lack of           






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