- 31 -
petition. Petitioners’ counsel persuaded respondent to abate the
assessments. After all the illegal assessments had been abated,
petitioners filed a motion under Rule 55 to restrain assessment
and collection. The origin and purpose of Rule 55 is described
in the Court’s explanatory Note. 93 T.C. 821, 876-877.
Petitioners’ counsel’s actions leading to the abatements are in
furtherance of the instant litigation; the costs thereof are
proper litigation costs. However, the Rule 55 motion, which was
filed after all the moved-for abatements had already been
accomplished, was moot at its inception. The costs of the Rule
55 motion shall be borne by petitioners and are not proper
litigation costs for our purposes.
We disagree with respondent’s contention that Sandra
unreasonably protracted the proceedings. Supra, Part C. The
costs incurred in connection with the actions respondent
identifies in this contention are includable in the base for the
one-eighth allocation.
The costs that have been incurred, and those that will be
incurred, in connection with the computations under Rule 155
(except those that relate to the award under section 7430) are
allocable entirely to Michael and so are not includable in the
base for the one-eighth allocation.
Sandra is the prevailing party but only with respect to the
excess of the civil fraud penalties over the negligence
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