- 12 -
represented by Izen, some represented by Sticht, and others by
Robert Alan Jones (Jones), be consolidated with the remaining
test cases.8
During the course of the evidentiary hearing mandated by
the Court of Appeals in DuFresne, Izen sought discovery of
documents regarding respondent’s conduct following the trial of
the test cases. Izen alleged, inter alia, that respondent’s
activities after May 1992 amounted to an effort to cover up the
fraudulent conduct of the Government attorneys in the test cases.
The Court denied Izen’s discovery requests. See Dixon III, sec.
III C.
In Dixon III, this Court held that the misconduct of McWade
and Sims in arranging and failing to disclose the Thompson
settlement did not create a structural defect but instead
resulted in harmless error. In Dixon III, the Court nevertheless
imposed sanctions against respondent, holding that Kersting
program participants who had not had final decisions entered in
their cases would be relieved of liability for the interest
component of the addition to tax for negligence under section
8The nontest cases that were consolidated with the remaining
test cases for purposes of the evidentiary hearing initially
included petitioners represented by Declan J. O’Donnell. Those
petitioners, however, dropped out and did not participate in the
evidentiary hearing, choosing instead to file a motion for
summary judgment to obtain the benefit of the Thompson
settlement. The Court denied the motion in Gridley v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1997-210.
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011