- 80 -
C. Parties Before the Court
The opinion of the Court of Appeals directs this Court “to
enter judgment in favor of Appellants and all other taxpayers
properly before this Court”. Dixon v. Commissioner, 316 F.3d at
1047. In a technical sense, the Dixon V opinion and the
implementing mandates might be deemed to extend only to those
parties who filed notices of appeal. See Abatti v. Commissioner,
859 F.2d 115, 120 (9th Cir. 1988). We believe, however, that the
Court of Appeals did not intend a technical, restricted
application of its opinion and mandates, nor, apparently, do the
parties. Following the hearings in these cases, the parties
filed a stipulation of settled issues. Among other things, that
stipulation recites:
1. The Kersting deficiencies of any petitioner
who has filed a piggyback agreement with the Tax Court
shall be determined in accord with the Ninth Circuit’s
mandates as implemented by the Tax Court on remand in
this proceeding * * *.
2. The Kersting deficiencies of any petitioner
in a case docketed before the Tax Court who has not
filed a piggyback agreement will, absent a showing of
cause, be determined in accord with the Ninth Circuit’s
mandates as implemented by the Tax Court on remand in
this proceeding * * *.
We read these stipulations to apply to all open cases of
petitioner participants in the Kersting tax shelter programs. In
other words, the parties have agreed--and properly so--that the
sanction applies to benefit not only to test case petitioners,
but also to nontest case petitioners in all remaining docketed
Page: Previous 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011