- 31 -
than 30 days after a decision is entered, or more importantly,
when this Court will grant a motion to vacate.
Because Rule 162 is silent on this matter, I look for
guidance to that Rule’s counterpart in the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure. Rule 1(a), Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure;
see Dusha v. Commissioner, 82 T.C. 592, 598-599 (1984). That
counterpart, rule 60 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
(rule 60), states:
Rule 60. Relief From Judgment or Order
(a) Clerical Mistakes. Clerical mistakes in
judgments, orders or other parts of the record and
errors therein arising from oversight or omission may
be corrected by the court at any time of its own
initiative or on the motion of any party and after such
notice, if any, as the court orders. During the
pendency of an appeal, such mistakes may be so
corrected before the appeal is docketed in the
appellate court, and thereafter while the appeal is
pending may be so corrected with leave of the appellate
court.
(b) Mistakes; Inadvertence; Excusable Neglect;
Newly Discovered Evidence; Fraud, Etc. On motion and
upon such terms as are just, the court may relieve a
party or a party’s legal representative from a final
judgment, order, or proceeding for the following
reasons: (1) mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or
excusable neglect; (2) newly discovered evidence which
by due diligence could not have been discovered in time
to move for a new trial under Rule 59(b); (3) fraud
(whether heretofore denominated intrinsic or
extrinsic), misrepresentation, or other misconduct of
an adverse party; (4) the judgment is void; (5) the
judgment has been satisfied, released, or discharged,
or a prior judgment upon which it is based has been
reversed or otherwise vacated, or it is no longer
equitable that the judgment should have prospective
application; or (6) any other reason justifying relief
from the operation of the judgment. The motion shall
Page: Previous 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011