- 5 -
Answer are deemed to be admitted for purposes of this case by
petitioner Meri R. Kaufman.”
In due course, the case was set for trial at sessions
commencing January 31, 2000; January 22, 2001; March 4, 2002;
January 6, 2003; and September 15, 2003. The case was continued
on three occasions by motions from petitioners and on one
occasion by motion from respondent. Each motion was premised at
least in part on awaiting resolution of a criminal case in Rhode
Island against Ms. Kaufman on embezzlement and fraudulent
conversion charges. Ms. Kaufman pleaded guilty on February 2,
2000, and was sentenced to 6 months’ home confinement, but
determination of the amounts of misappropriated funds and of
restitution was deferred. In late summer of 2002, the amount of
restitution was set; however, apparently no determination was
made as to the amount of misappropriated funds.
On August 5, 2003, respondent filed the instant motion for
“a partial summary adjudication in respondent’s favor in this
case upon the issue of the liabilities of Meri R. Kaufman for
deficiencies in income tax and fraud penalties for 1993 through
1995.” Respondent submits that “Upon the granting of this
motion, the following issues remain for trial: the liability of
William R. Kaufman for 1993, 1994 and 1995 income taxes based on
unreported taxable embezzlement income received in those years.”
Petitioners were ordered to file any response to respondent’s
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011