Diana Van Arsdalen, f.k.a. Diana Murray - Page 4

                                        - 4 -                                         
          that Mr. Murray would be permitted to intervene in the case for             
          the sole purpose of challenging petitioner’s entitlement to                 
          relief from joint and several liability.3                                   
               On April 1, 2004, Mr. Murray lodged with the Court a notice            
          of intervention.  In the notice of intervention, Mr. Murray                 
          stated that he “seeks to intervene for the sole purpose of                  
          offering evidence in support of the Petitioner’s right and                  
          entitlement to equitable relief under IRC section 6015(f) and               
          will not be offering any evidence to challenge Petitioner’s right           
          to equitable relief under IRC section 6015(f).”                             
               This matter was called for hearing at the Court’s motions              
          session held in Washington, D.C.  Counsel for respondent appeared           
          at the hearing and offered argument in opposition to petitioner’s           
          Motion to strike.  Although no appearance was entered by or on              
          behalf of petitioner at the hearing, petitioner filed with the              
          Court a written statement pursuant to Rule 50(c).                           
                                   Discussion                                         
               Section 6013(d)(3) provides that if a husband and wife file            
          a joint Federal income tax return, “the tax shall be computed on            
          the aggregate income and the liability with respect to the tax              
          shall be joint and several.”  However, section 6015(a) provides             


               3On Mar. 16, 2004, the Court denied petitioner’s motion to             
          strike.  On Mar. 18, 2004, petitioner filed a motion to vacate              
          the Court’s Order denying her motion to strike.  By Order dated             
          Mar. 31, 2004, we granted petitioner’s motion to vacate, vacated            
          and set aside our order denying petitioner’s motion to strike,              
          and set petitioner’s motion to strike for hearing.                          



Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011