Louis A. and Christine Cox - Page 30

                                       - 30 -                                         
               Thus, while the remark complained of by petitioners may                
          sound harsh standing alone, it was made in the context of a                 
          review which went on to consider and accurately to summarize the            
          particular reasons for the result reached in the earlier matter.            
          Moreover, as the facts found above indicate, Mr. Skidmore then              
          proceeded to grant repeated requests from petitioners for more              
          time to prepare for the hearing and to submit updated financial             
          information.  His notes also document and discuss his analysis of           
          the financial materials ultimately provided by petitioners,                 
          commenting in detail about specific items and why they continued            
          to fall short of establishing petitioners’ qualification for                
          collection alternatives.  This accommodation of petitioners’                
          scheduling needs and careful review of the particular evidence              
          offered indicates a willingness to consider anew the merits of              
          petitioners’ then-existing circumstances and is the antithesis of           
          prejudgment.                                                                
               The second factual point emphasized by petitioners in their            
          quest to show bias is the timing of Mr. Skidmore’s conclusion               
          that a determination letter should be issued; i.e, that the                 
          decision was made on the same day as the hearing was held.                  
          Again, however, the record reveals nothing inappropriate.                   
          Petitioners submitted their financial documentation prior to the            
          hearing and offered nothing further at the conference that would            
          justify delay for additional review.  Mr. Skidmore’s notes with             






Page:  Previous  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011