- 5 -
not seek authorization from his supervisor, Harold J.
Finkelstein, Lead Appeals Team Manager, on the discussed values.
On February 22, 2002, Ms. Koch met with the estate’s
representatives, during which Mr. Whoriskey again raised the
issue that an enforceable basis of settlement had been reached by
Mr. Lindenbaum and Mr. Sherland. Prior to the filing of the
instant motion, the parties did not execute any documents or file
any documents with the Court regarding these discussions, nor did
the parties make any representations to the Court that a basis of
settlement had been reached.
On March 7, 2002, the estate filed a motion for entry of
decision based upon an agreed basis of settlement. On March 18,
2002, respondent filed a notice of objection wherein he objected
to the granting of the estate’s motion. The Court scheduled the
evidentiary hearing on March 25, 2002. Additionally, the Court
granted the estate’s motion for continuance of the trial because
the estate’s expert could not testify on the scheduled date due
to health concerns.
Discussion
The Court applies general principles of contract law to
compromises and settlements of Federal tax cases. We stated in
Robbins Tire & Rubber Co. v. Commissioner, 52 T.C. 420, 435-436
(1969), that “a compromise is a contract and thus is a proper
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011