- 11 -
claims. After respondent filed a response, the Court denied
petitioners’ motion on November 15, 2004, as their claims were
both factually and legally insufficient to support any relief in
this proceeding. We also cautioned petitioners to take heed of
our earlier warning with regard to section 6673.
This case was called from the calendar of the trial session
of the Court in Las Vegas, Nevada, on December 6, 2004, and a
trial was held the following day. At the outset, the Court
explained to Mr. Carrillo, who appeared on behalf of himself and
his wife, as follows:
THE COURT: * * * And if you review my order
which was issued in this case, Mr. Carrillo, and that
order is dated September 15, 2004, denying the
government’s motion for summary judgment, I have
already held as a matter of law that the government did
fail to provide you with the right to record a hearing,
which you were entitled to.
So you can consider that issue established, and I
believe that Mr. Thorley acknowledged that the Court as
a whole had concluded that, and the government has now
acquiesced in that error.
The issue that you need to keep and be aware of is
that in another case issued the same day as Keene, the
Kemper case, the Court found that where the taxpayers
are making only frivolous arguments for delay, which
have been routinely rejected by our court and all
higher courts, that there is no need to remand the case
for a hearing if that is the only case that the
taxpayer is making, unless the taxpayer is making an
argument that is permitted under * * * [6330], there is
no need to remand it.
We can decide the case on the evidence before us,
and this is your trial. It is being recorded
verbatim., word-for-word, and you can get a copy of it.
And so if you have any other issues that you have not
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011