- 16 -
previously agreed deficiencies and interest. The refunds,
estimated to exceed $60,000, were to be used to pay Mr.
DeCastro’s fees in connection with the test case trial.
Moreover, if the results of the trial were more favorable to the
Thompsons than the new agreement, they would be entitled to the
results of the trial. On August 3, 1989, Mr. DeCastro wrote a
letter to Mr. McWade, reducing the new agreement to writing. Mr.
McWade signed the letter and returned it to Mr. DeCastro.
When Messrs. McWade and DeCastro reached the new agreement,
respondent’s official settlement policy still provided for a 7-
percent reduction in determined deficiencies, elimination of the
negligence additions, and other minor concessions. This was
notwithstanding that some petitioners’ attorneys, including Mr.
DeCastro and Messrs. Chicoine and Hallett, had previously
negotiated 20-percent reduction settlements on behalf of some of
their clients. The new agreement, however, reduced the
Thompsons’ determined deficiencies for the years at issue from
$79,293 to $30,000--a reduction of 62 percent. The new agreement
was thus a much more substantial deviation from respondent’s
official settlement policy. Messrs. Sims’s and McWade’s
superiors did not approve the new agreement. They did not
discover the new agreement until after this Court had tried the
test cases and issued its opinion and initial decisions therein.
Page: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011