Jesse M. and Lura L. Lewis - Page 19

                                       - 19 -                                         
               The memorandum further advised that Messrs. O’Donnell and              
          Jones had “a Program to abate I.R.S. activity against its’ [sic]            
          clients until the dispute is finally resolved by Appeal.                    
          Enclosed herewith is a letter from Mr. Alan Jones to Mr. Kenneth            
          McWade, IRS District Counsel, which establishes this treaty.”               
               Another memorandum, dated May 18, 1992, entitled                       
          “Relationship to Henry Kersting”, discussed Messrs. O’Donnell’s             
          and Jones’s request to assist in preparing the taxpayers’                   
          appellate brief in the appeal of the test cases.  It quoted a               
          communication from Mr. Kersting to Mr. Izen as follows:                     
               Joe Izen - Joe - You probably know by the messages left                
               at your office that Alan Jones and Declan O’Donnell                    
               have been trying to reach you for several days.  They                  
               need to talk to you for all sorts of reasons as they                   
               are representing now a number of our mutual clients.                   
               Moreover, they have developed certain contributions to                 
               the Appeal to be filed at the Ninth Circuit Court of                   
               Appeals in San Francisco of which you should know as                   
               you are formulating the Briefs.  I wish you would take                 
               the time and return their calls.  Henry. 05/11/92.                     
               In the meantime, in March 1992, this Court had entered                 
          decisions in the test cases in accordance with its opinion in               
          favor of respondent.  The test case petitioners (with the                   
          exception of the Thompsons and the Cravenses) appealed the                  
          decisions in their cases to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the               
          Ninth Circuit.                                                              
               After entry of the decisions in the test cases, Mr. McWade             
          attempted to have respondent’s Collection Division assess                   
          deficiencies in the Thompson and Cravens cases in accordance with           





Page:  Previous  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011