Jerome Griggs Beery - Page 4




                                        - 4 -                                         

          tried, an opinion was issued, Beery v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo.             
          1996-464, and a decision was entered on April 24, 1997.                     
          Petitioners thereafter filed a motion to vacate the decision to             
          enable them to claim the carryforward of a net operating loss               
          sustained in 1976.  The Court considered that claim as a new                
          issue, which was not brought up at trial and, accordingly, denied           
          the motion to vacate.  Petitioner and his spouse also filed a               
          petition with this Court, at docket No. 8802-96, challenging the            
          notice of deficiency relating to their 1992, 1993, and 1994 tax             
          years.  The disposition of that case is noted later.                        
               On February 25, 1994, while docket No. 26995-93 was pending            
          before this Court, petitioner filed for bankruptcy in the U.S.              
          Bankruptcy Court for the State of New Mexico.  On December 17,              
          1997, petitioner received a discharge in bankruptcy under chapter           
          7 of the Bankruptcy Code.  The pending bankruptcy proceeding was            
          never called to this Court's attention until after the decision             
          was entered in docket No. 26995-93 (relating to petitioner's                
          1989, 1990, and 1991 tax years).  Because of the automatic stay             
          provisions of the Bankruptcy Code, which affected docket No.                
          26995-93, and because this Court had never formally stayed the              
          proceedings, respondent proceeded in the Bankruptcy Court and               
          attained an order, which was not opposed by petitioner and was              
          affirmed by the U.S. District Court for the District of New                 
          Mexico, which retroactively lifted the stay applicable to this              





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011