- 6 -
Court’s Rules of Practice and Procedure. The Supreme Court
indicated that the failure to disclose the Couvillion report and
to specify the Tax Court Judge’s mode of reviewing that report
impeded fully informed appellate review of the Tax Court’s
decision. Ballard v. Commissioner, 544 U.S. at ___, 125 S. Ct.
at 1283.
In Estate of Kanter v. Commissioner, 406 F.3d 933, 934 (7th
Cir. 2005), the Court of Appeals vacated and remanded the Kanter
deficiency cases to this Court “for further proceedings
consistent with the Supreme Court’s decision in Estate of Burton
W. Kanter v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, No. 03-1034”.
In Ballard v. Commissioner, 429 F.3d 1026, 1027 (11th Cir.
2005), the Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit remanded the
Ballard cases to this Court with the following instructions:
(1) The “collaborative report and opinion” of the Tax
Court is ordered stricken; (2) The original report of
the special trial judge is ordered reinstated; (3) The
Chief Judge of the Tax Court is instructed to assign
this matter to a regular Tax Court Judge who had no
involvement in the preparation of the aforementioned
“collaborative report;” (4) The Tax Court shall proceed
to review this matter in accordance with the dictates
of the Supreme Court, and with the Tax Court's newly
revised Rules 182 and 183, giving “due regard” to the
credibility determinations of the special trial judge
and presuming correct fact findings of the trial judge.
* * *
In Estate of Lisle v. Commissioner, 431 F.3d 439 (5th Cir.
2005), the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit recalled its
earlier mandate and directed this Court to reexamine the question
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011