- 23 -
Mr. McCarthy signed the stipulation of settled issues on behalf
of WFO on March 11, 2003, are undisputed. The pending dispute
over whether Mr. Mansour should take the place of Mrs. Wolfe as
the authorized representative of WFO in this proceeding relates
to a period beginning in April of 2003, after the settlement was
agreed to and the stipulation of settled issues was signed.8
Accordingly, the dispute over who currently represents WFO in
this proceeding does not affect the determination concerning
enforcement of the settlement.
In reliance on the stipulation of settled issues, this Court
canceled the trial. Thus, petitioners must meet a high standard
before we will relieve them of their settlement, such as a
showing of lack of formal consent, fraud, mistake, or similar
ground. Dorchester Indus., Inc. v. Commissioner, supra at 335.
Messrs. Wolfe and Mansour have made no such showing. To the
contrary, the record establishes that Mr. and Mrs. Wolfe were
aware of the issues Mr. Mansour had raised and, after consulting
with their counsel, decided to accept the settlement rather than
incur the expense and risk of a trial. Accordingly, we conclude
that petitioners are bound by the terms of the stipulation of
8 Messrs. Wolfe and Mansour appear to have conceded, as late
as Apr. 21, 2003, that Mrs. Wolfe was the authorized
representative of WFO by virtue of their causing her to sign two
affidavits on that date concerning the settlement, one on her own
behalf and one on behalf of WFO.
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