- 20 -
a January 20, 2003, letter that he purportedly sent to Mr.
McCarthy to instruct Mr. McCarthy “not to make any decisions on
our behalf without our written approval.” Relying on the letter,
Mr. Wolfe made the additional claim that he had instructed Mr.
McCarthy both orally and in writing that any settlement of these
cases required the written approval of himself and Mrs. Wolfe,
which was not given.
The claim that this letter was sent to Mr. McCarthy is open
to considerable doubt. Messrs. McCarthy and Brant both testified
that they had never seen the letter prior to the hearing and that
it was not in the client files that Mr. McCarthy’s firm
maintained. Mr. Wolfe offered no rationale for the requirement
of written approval, while Mr. McCarthy convincingly testified
that he did not agree, and would not have agreed, to such a
condition on his representation of a client in Tax Court, given
the Court’s compressed trial schedules and general practice of
requiring litigants to be prepared at a trial session either to
try a case or to provide proof of settlement. On its face, the
letter contains irregularities; unlike Mr. Wolfe’s other
correspondence in the record, it has no mailing address, nor is
Mr. Mansour copied thereon. We also note that the letter, if
sent, could have had a significant impact on the scope of Mr.
McCarthy’s settlement authority. Yet on no occasion prior to the
hearing did Mr. Wolfe or Mr. Mansour ever mention this letter or
Page: Previous 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011