-16-
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.
* * *
The Court of Appeals also stated that Special Trial Judge
Couvillion’s findings of fact are to be presumed correct “unless
manifestly unreasonable”. Id. at 1032.
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
whether the Estate of Lisle is liable for tax deficiencies
consistent with the instructions handed down by the Court of
Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit in Ballard v. Commissioner, 429
F.3d at 1027.9
9 The Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit’s mandate in
the Lisle cases includes a reference to the case filed with this
Court at docket No. 20219-91. However, the Court’s decision in
(continued...)
Page: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011