- 21 -
7482(b)(1) provides that the venue for appeal of a case involving
a petitioner who is an individual is the legal residence of the
petitioner. Sec. 7482(b)(1)(A). Legal residence is determined
as of the time the petition was filed. Sec. 7482(b)(1) (third
sentence).
At the time she filed the petition, petitioner resided in
Michigan. Accordingly, in the absence of a stipulation to the
contrary, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit is the
likely venue for any appeal of this case. See sec. 7482(b)(2).
We have found no published authority of the U.S. Court of
Appeals for the Sixth Circuit adopting the Price approach. The
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit has adopted the
following standard for reason to know in deduction cases:
The test adopted by the Sanders court is the same
test advanced by the Restatement (Second) of Agency �
9, comment d (1958), which reads as follows:
A person has reason to know of a fact if he
had information from which a person of
ordinary intelligence which such person may
have, or of the superior intelligence which
such person may have, would infer that the
fact in question exists or that there is such
a substantial chance of its existence that,
in exercising reasonable care with reference
to the matter in question, his action would
be predicated upon the assumption of its
possible existence.
The primary ingredients of the “reason to know” tests
are (1) the circumstances which face the petitioner;
and (2) whether a reasonable person in the same
position would infer that omissions or erroneous
deductions had been made. [Shea v. Commissioner, 780
Page: Previous 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011