Julie C. Nichols, n.k.a. Julie C. Amrein - Page 4

                                        - 4 -                                         
          The attachment to the petition and to the Form 8857 repeated                
          petitioner’s denial of knowledge of the sale of the lottery                 
          proceeds and referred to her limited education, her disability as           
          a result of a 1995 automobile accident, her use of medications,             
          her lack of involvement in financial affairs during her marriage            
          to Nichols, her lack of participation in preparation of the 1998            
          tax return, and Nichols’s subsequent imprisonment as a result of            
          an unrelated matter.  Among the allegations were the following:             
                    14.  I did not discover that James had actually                   
               sold his lottery rights until January 15, 2002.  This                  
               information was given to me by a mutual acquaintance                   
               who was James’ former business partner.  Even as of                    
               this date, I still am not certain as to when (or even                  
               if) James sold his lottery rights.                                     
                           *    *    *    *    *    *    *                            
                    22.  When I allegedly signed the ‘98 return, I had                
               no knowledge or reason to know of the alleged sale of                  
               James’ lottery rights and, even if I had, I would not                  
               have possessed the mental capacity to even notice that                 
               such proceeds were not reported on the ‘98 return or                   
               even that they should have been reported.                              
                    23.  I did not know, nor did I have reason to                     
               know, of James’ failure to report the income from the                  
               alleged sale of his lottery rights on the ‘98 return.                  
                                       OPINION                                        
               After this case was set for trial, counsel who filed the               
          petition on behalf of petitioner moved to withdraw.  Petitioner             
          did not object, and the motion to withdraw was granted.  During             
          trial, as discussed below, it became apparent that petitioner’s             
          execution of the Certificate of Marital Status, as an incident to           






Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011