Gary W. McDonough - Page 2

                                        - 2 -                                         
          Pursuant to section 6330(d), petitioner seeks review of                     
          respondent’s determination.  The sole issue for decision is                 
          whether respondent abused his discretion in sustaining the                  
          proposed levy action.                                                       
                                  FINDINGS OF FACT                                    
               The parties’ stipulation of facts and the attached exhibits            
          are incorporated herein by this reference.  The facts stipulated            
          are so found.2  Petitioner resided in Westminster, California,              

          the Internal Revenue Code, as amended, and all Rule references              
          are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure.  Amounts              
          are rounded to the nearest dollar.                                          
               2   Respondent reserved relevancy objections to many of the            
          exhibits attached to the stipulations of fact.  Fed. R. Evid. 402           
          provides the general rule that all relevant evidence is                     
          admissible, while evidence which is not relevant is not                     
          admissible.  Fed. R. Evid. 401 defines relevant evidence as                 
          “evidence having any tendency to make the existence of any fact             
          that is of consequence to the determination of the action more              
          probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence.”           
          While the relevancy of some exhibits is certainly limited, this             
          Court finds that the exhibits meet the threshold definition of              
          relevant evidence and are admissible.  The Court will give the              
          exhibits only such consideration as is warranted by their                   
          pertinence to the Court’s analysis of petitioner’s case.                    
               Respondent also objected to many of the exhibits on the                
          basis of hearsay.  Even if the Court were to receive those                  
          exhibits into evidence, they would have no impact on our findings           
          of fact or on the outcome of this case.                                     

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