- 9 -
A. Failure To Prosecute–-Sanction by Dismissal
Respondent moved to dismiss this case for petitioners’
failure to prosecute. Rule 123 provides that this Court may, at
any time, dismiss a case and enter a decision against a taxpayer.
Dismissal is the severest sanction that a court may apply.
Durgin v. Graham, 372 F.2d 130, 131 (5th Cir. 1967); Freedson v.
Commissioner, 67 T.C. 931, 937 (1977), affd. 565 F.2d 954 (5th
Cir. 1978). “[I]ts use must be tempered by a careful exercise of
judicial discretion.” Freedson v. Commissioner, supra at 937.
Dismissal may properly be granted where the party’s failure is
due to willfulness, bad faith, or fault. Levy v. Commissioner,
87 T.C. 794, 803 (1986). A case may be dismissed for failure
properly to prosecute when taxpayers fail to appear at trial and
do not otherwise participate in the resolution of their claims.
Basic Bible Church v. Commissioner, 86 T.C. 110, 114 (1986);
Ritchie v. Commissioner, 72 T.C. 126, 128-129 (1979); Ulery v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1990-409.
Petitioners have been admonished that their failure to
comply with this Court’s Orders and Rules could result in a
default. Petitioners failed to comply with this Court’s Standing
Pretrial Order and Rules requiring the preparation of this case,
including the requirement to meet and/or work with respondent’s
counsel to exchange documents and information, stipulate facts,
and otherwise to prepare for trial. Petitioner is an experienced
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011