- 12 -
delays are explained by the complexities and burdens of managing
the cases.
In circumstances comparable to those here, in Lee v.
Commissioner, 113 T.C. 145, 150 (1999), the Court stated:
The mere passage of time in the litigation phase
of a tax dispute does not establish error or delay by
the Commissioner in performing a ministerial act. The
length of time required to resolve the * * * case was a
result of the Government’s litigation strategy to
dispose of the criminal indictments first and the
Court’s disposition of the parties’ procedural motions.
Respondent’s decision on how to proceed in the
litigation phase of the case necessarily required the
exercise of judgment and thus cannot be a ministerial
act. We, therefore, conclude that the passage of 11
years in the litigation phase of the case at bar is not
attributable to error or delay in performing a
ministerial act. [Fn. ref. omitted.]
See also Jacobs v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2000-123.
In consideration of the events that were occurring from
April 15, 1984, to trial of the Kelley cases in 1992, we cannot
conclude that the passage of time is attributable to error or
delay in performing a ministerial act. The Appeals officer’s
partial allowance of petitioner’s claim gave petitioner relief of
amounts accruing for approximately 7 years from May 1992 to April
1999. Although that result is not satisfactory to petitioner, we
have found no basis for further relief under the circumstances.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011