John G. Goettee, Jr. and Marian Goettee - Page 11

                                       - 11 -                                         
          settlement package.  As a result, the uniform settlement package            
          was withdrawn a month before the scheduled pretrial conference.             
               At the June 16, 1989, pretrial conference, representatives             
          of the promoters for the Barrister partnerships suggested that it           
          would be better to have a promoter-funded TEFRA partnership case            
          as a lead Barrister case.  Special Trial Judge Pate agreed with             
          that approach.  That pretrial conference did not result in the              
          selection of a Barrister lead case.                                         
               During September 1989, Barrister Equipment Assocs. Series              
          #115 v. Commissioner, docket No. 23263-89 (hereinafter sometimes            
          referred to as Series 115) was selected as the lead case for                
          Barrister.  Series 115 involved 1983 and 1984; it was a TEFRA               
          partnership case.                                                           
               In late 1989, the Court was informally advised that Shematz            
          had died.  Thereafter, petitioners proceeded pro se.                        
               On October 20, 1989, a motion was filed in Series 115 to               
          reassign that case from Special Trial Judge Pate to a                       
          Presidentially appointed Judge of this Court.  The motion was               
          based on contentions that assignment of that case to a Special              
          Trial Judge was not authorized by statute and that it violated              
          the United States Constitution.  The motion also requested that,            
          if the Court denied the motion, then the Court should stay the              
          case and certify the issue for interlocutory appellate review               
          pursuant to section 7482(a)(2).                                             

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