Francis A. Morlino - Page 15

                                       - 15 -                                         
          submitted.4  While the final 2-week deadline may seem short when            
          considered in isolation, we do not consider it in isolation.                
          Rather, we consider it in context, see, e.g., Roman v.                      
          Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2004-20, which context includes the                
          longer period that petitioner had to comply with Mr. O’Shea’s               
          requests and the fact that there is no evidence that either                 
          petitioner or Mr. Burke protested the deadline or asked for any             
          extension.  If there is fault here, it lies not with Mr. O’Shea             
          in setting a deadline of September 2, 2003.                                 
               C.  Other Arguments                                                    
                    1.  Introduction                                                  
               On brief, petitioner describes the following errors, which             
          are either in addition to or supplement his principal assignment            
          of error, that Mr. O’Shea abused his discretion by prematurely              
          concluding the section 6330 hearing:  (1) Mr. O’Shea was biased             
          by his belief that the hearing had to be promptly concluded, (2)            
          respondent did not conduct the hearing in good faith, (3)                   
          respondent was not flexible in considering petitioner’s matter,             
          (4) the lack of ascertainable standards to be followed at section           
          6330 hearings violates due process, and (5) Mr. O’Shea was not              

               4  In addition to referencing the offer in compromise that             
          petitioner submitted on Nov. 20, 2002, and which was rejected on            
          Jan. 15, 2003, the record contains a copy of another rejected               
          offer in compromise, signed by petitioner on July 9, 2001, and              
          relating to trust fund recovery penalties imposed with respect to           
          employment taxes due in 1997.                                               

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011