Stanley K. and Tomi L. Baumann - Page 3

                                        - 3 -                                         
               Petitioners timely filed a petition contesting respondent’s            
          determination in the deficiency notice.  At the time petitioners            
          filed their joint petition, petitioners resided in Oklahoma City,           
          Oklahoma.  Attorney Frederick J. O’Laughlin (counsel) represented           
          both petitioners in the deficiency proceeding.                              
               Respondent filed a motion for summary judgment (summary                
          judgment motion) on May 7, 2002, involving all issues set forth             
          in the deficiency notice.  Respondent asserted in the summary               
          judgment motion that petitioners were not entitled, as a matter             
          of law, to deduct gambling losses in excess of gambling income              
          under section 165(d).  On the date petitioners were ordered to              
          file a response to respondent’s summary judgment motion,                    
          petitioners’ counsel filed a motion to withdraw as counsel for              
          Tomi, because petitioners had since divorced and their divorce              
          created a conflict of interest.  Along with the motion to                   
          withdraw, counsel filed, on behalf of both petitioners, a                   
          response to respondent’s summary judgment motion.  The Court                
          granted counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw as counsel for               
          Tomi.                                                                       














Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011