- 2 -
Daniel C. Ertel, for petitioners.
Lydia A. Branche, for respondent.
SUPPLEMENTAL MEMORANDUM OPINION
NIMS, Judge: This case remains before the Court on
petitioners’ Motion for Reconsideration of Findings or Opinion
under Rule 161, and Motion to Vacate or Revise Decision under
Rule 162 (collectively, the Motions). Since the Motions are
interconnected we deal with them together. The Motions relate to
our Memorandum Opinion, Lowry v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2003-
225, filed July 30, 2003, which we incorporate herein, and the
Decision entered thereunder.
Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to
sections of the Internal Revenue Code in effect at all relevant
times hereunder, and all Rule references are to those contained
in Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure.
In Lowry v. Commissioner, supra, we held, on the issue now
again challenged by petitioners, that petitioners realized a
section 1231 gain in 1994 rather than in 1993, as they contended.
Rules 161 and 162 provide for Motions for Reconsideration of
Findings or Opinion and for Motions to Vacate or Revise a
Decision, respectively. Reconsideration allows the Court to
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011