- 46 -
at random. Petitioners, in their tax shelter case, never
initiated this type of contact with respondent’s counsel.”
2. As a result of petitioners’ letter accompanying the
signed decision document, “Any attorney would have to
consider and determine whether petitioners intended to enter
into the settlement.”
Evidently, respondent had not communicated this concession
to petitioners before petitioners sent their answering brief to
the Court. Consequently, petitioners have not had the
opportunity to point out any implications that respondent’s
concession of 60 days of the second period might have on the 80
days of the second period that remain in dispute.
We take the foregoing into account in our analysis.
December 14, 1994, is the date petitioners mailed to
respondent the executed decision document, and May 2, 1995, is
the date we entered decision in petitioners’ case. Respondent
did not explain the significance of February 25, 1995. April 25,
1995, is the date Winkler signed the decision document in
petitioners’ case.
Between December 14, 1994, and December 23, 1994, Rowland
(1) received petitioners’ signed decision document, (2) prepared
and signed an appeal transmittal and case memorandum which
outlined the terms of the settlement, and (3) forwarded the
appeals transmittal and case memorandum to Becker for his
Page: Previous 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011