Laura K. Davis, et al. - Page 15

                                       - 15 -                                         
          issue of fact, we declined to adjudicate summarily petitioners’             
          affirmative defense claims.                                                 
               By the order we issued in docket No. 146-05L, we also denied           
          respondent’s motion for a penalty under section 6673(a)(1).  We             
          explained that, because we were only granting partial summary               
          judgment in that case, we would await further developments before           
          determining whether a penalty is appropriate.  We added that we             
          would also consider imposing excess costs on counsel pursuant to            
          section 6673(a)(2) should we conclude that counsel had taken                
          actions to multiply the proceeding unreasonably and vexatiously.            
          We likewise warned petitioners and counsel in the orders issued             
          in the other cases that we were considering the imposition of               
          penalties and costs.  In all of the orders, we stated our                   
          impressions that petitioner, aided by counsel, may have (1)                 
          instituted and maintained the proceeding before this Court                  
          primarily to delay the collection of his income tax liability,              
          (2) in support of that goal, raised frivolous arguments and                 
          relied on groundless claims, and (3) unreasonably failed to                 
          pursue his opportunity for a section 6330 hearing.  We cataloged            
          our concerns with respect to each petitioner generally as                   
          follows:  He had not challenged respondent’s statements in                  
          support of the motion for summary judgment that petitioner                  
          received a notice of deficiency and failed to petition the Tax              
          Court; he had failed to present the settlement officer any                  

Page:  Previous  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  Next 

Last modified: November 10, 2007