- 27 -
motion was made to add evidence to the record which should have
been introduced or stipulated at an earlier time.
We granted petitioners’ motion to reopen the record but only
to the extent of certain concessions made by respondent; we
denied that motion in all other respects. The record then was
closed, and our opinion in Downing I was later issued.
Respondent states that petitioners had in their possession
before the trial all the evidence which they sought to have
admitted into the record by their motion, and respondent argues:
“They cannot be heard to complain at this late date that they
were unfairly disadvantaged by having to check their own records
against schedules prepared by respondent.” Even so, respondent
made numerous concessions on matters raised in petitioners’
motion. See Downing I, nn. 24-27.
Some of respondent’s concessions reflect errors that had
been earlier made by respondent, which respondent both implicitly
and expressly acknowledges. Each of the error corrections was in
petitioners’ favor. The net effects of respondent’s concessions
were to reduce unreported income for 1994 by almost $500, and for
1995 by more than $8,000. These amounts are not trivial in the
context of the instant case.
Petitioners should have noticed and corrected errors in the
stipulation document before signing it, and they should have
offered all evidence by the end of the trial. However, given the
Page: Previous 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011