- 12 -
that he did not have the affidavits at trial because he expected
the trial to be 2 weeks after the calendar call. We deny his
request for reasons stated next.
Reopening the record to submit additional evidence is a
matter within the discretion of the trial court. Zenith Radio
Corp. v. Hazeltine Research, Inc., 401 U.S. 321, 331 (1971);
Butler v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 276, 286-287 (2000). A court
generally will not grant a motion to reopen the record unless,
among other requirements, the evidence relied on (1) is material
to the issue for decision and (2) probably would change the
outcome of the case. Butler v. Commissioner, supra at 287.
Dunstan’s affidavit states that petitioner misunderstood
that a stock transaction was a nontaxable exchange and not a
sale. Dunstan’s affidavit does not show that the sales of mutual
fund shares were nontaxable exchanges, that Dunstan believed or
told petitioner that they were nontaxable exchanges, that Dunstan
was a tax professional, or that petitioner relied on Dunstan’s
advice. Petitioner has not provided any other affidavits. Thus,
we have no reason to believe that, if admitted, the affidavits
would change the outcome of this case. In addition, affidavits
are generally inadmissible to show the proof of the contents
because they are hearsay. Woodall v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo.
2002-318 n.6; Yang-Wu v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2002-68 n.11;
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011