- 7 -
Qualified Medical Examiner, and an Independent Medical Examiner.5
Based on a physical examination, Dr. Freed determined that
petitioner “was a well developed, sixty-seven year old well
nourished male not in acute distress,” and petitioner “was alert
and cooperative.” Dr. Freed concluded that petitioner’s hearing
aids were adequate for his current hearing loss.
At the trial, the Court asked petitioner if he could hear us
and respondent. He answered, “Yes”. Petitioner also stated that
his physical condition had improved.
Petitioner was represented by counsel at the July 6, 2000,
hearing and the November 9, 2000, meeting. Petitioner’s physical
condition was not discussed at the July 6, 2000, hearing or the
September 9, 2000, meeting. During 2000, Appeals Officer Bailey
was not aware of petitioner’s physical condition. See Magana v.
Commissioner, 118 T.C. 488 (2002).
Given the fact that respondent was not made aware of
petitioner’s 1995 stroke or hearing loss and that petitioner was
represented by counsel, 4 months was a reasonable amount of time
to allow petitioner to submit his financial information.
Furthermore, the evidence petitioner provided at trial does not
suggest that he was physically unable to compile his financial
5 The record does not contain an explanation of these
titles.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011