- 16 -
OPINION
I. Motion for Entry of Decisions
A. Counsel’s Authority To Settle
The question of whether counsel has the authority to settle
a case on behalf of a taxpayer is factual and must be decided
according to common law principles of agency. Dorchester Indus.,
Inc. v. Commissioner, 108 T.C. 320, 331 (1997), affd. without
published opinion 208 F.3d 205 (3d Cir. 2000); Adams v.
Commissioner, 85 T.C. 359, 369-372 (1985); Kraasch v.
Commissioner, 70 T.C. 623, 627-629 (1978). Authority may be
granted by express statements or by implication from a taxpayer’s
words or deeds. Estate of Quirk v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo.
1995-234. Where taxpayers challenge the authority of counsel to
act on their behalf, the burden of proof rests with the taxpayers
to show that their counsel lacked authority. Newbern v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1999-112.
The evidence presented on this issue consists of
petitioners’ various submissions to this Court after cancellation
of the trial, documentary evidence introduced at the hearing, and
the conflicting testimony of Messrs. McCarthy, Brant, and Neubeck
and Mrs. Wolfe, on the one hand, and of Mr. Wolfe, on the other.
Distilling truth from the testimony of witnesses, whose demeanor
we observe and whose credibility we evaluate, is "the daily grist
of judicial life." Diaz v. Commissioner, 58 T.C. 560, 564
Page: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011