- 2 -
costs1 pursuant to Rule 2312 and section 7430. The issues we must
decide are whether petitioners were the prevailing party within
the meaning of section 7430 and whether petitioners have
substantiated any recoverable costs. For the reasons stated
below, petitioners’ motion for reasonable costs will be denied.
Background
At the time of filing the petition, petitioners resided in
Washington, D.C. Petitioner Neil M. Cowie (Mr. Cowie) is an
attorney licensed to practice law in the Commonwealth of
Virginia. Petitioners proceeded pro se at all times relevant to
the instant motion.
Mr. Cowie and his father, Dr. James B. Cowie (Dr. Cowie),
agreed in August 1998 that Mr. Cowie would invest funds provided
by Dr. Cowie for Dr. Cowie’s benefit. To avoid paying two sets
of transaction fees and to save time, Mr. Cowie deposited funds
provided by Dr. Cowie into Mr. Cowie’s existing brokerage
account.
1Although petitioners titled the instant motion “MOTION FOR
LITIGATION COSTS”, it appears that petitioners are seeking both
administrative and litigation costs. We will consider the
instant motion as a motion for both administrative and litigation
costs.
2Unless otherwise indicated, all Rule references are to the
Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure, and all section
references are to the Internal Revenue Code, as amended.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 10, 2007