- 18 -
on February 2, 2001, and by respondent on February 26, 2001.
Both parties admitted that the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) was
pursuing a criminal investigation of petitioner’s stockholders.9
Petitioner believed the investigation may have been related to
its stockholders’ relationships with ECI or its owners.
Petitioner’s stockholders interposed their Fifth Amendment
privilege to respondent’s discovery requests of petitioner.
Consequently, petitioner asserted it had insufficient information
to either admit or deny certain of respondent’s requests for
admissions.
On February 2, 2001, respondent filed his application for a
letter of request authorizing a foreign deposition under the
United Kingdom Evidence (Proceedings in Other Jurisdictions) Act
1975 to preserve foreign-based bank records of Barclays Bank PLC
relating to an account held in the name of ECI and to discern the
identity of ECI’s owners.10 On February 5, 2001, petitioner
filed its objection to respondent’s application for a foreign
deposition. On February 8, 2001, the Court granted respondent’s
application for a letter of request authorizing a foreign
9The record does not disclose whether the IRS has completed
its criminal investigation of petitioner’s stockholders.
10Respondent claims ECI is a foreign corporation that
conceals its business operations and its beneficial owners. John
Fitzgerald, a director of ECI, declared petitioner has no direct
or indirect control over ECI and there is no identity or overlap
of ownership between petitioner and ECI. Petitioner also claimed
that none of its officers or stockholders knows who owns or
controls ECI.
Page: Previous 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011