Trial Calendar:Charleston, WV
Date: October 6, 2008
PRETRIAL MEMORANDUM FOR Petitioner
Please type or print legibly
(This form my be expanded as necessary)
NAME OF CASE: DOCKET NO.(S)__________________30xxx
Julie Patriot
v. CIR
ATTORNEYS:
Petitioner: ___Pro se____________ Respondent: ___________________________
Tel.No.: _______000-000-0000 Tel. No.: ____________________________
AMOUNTS IN DISPUTE:
Year(s)/Period(s) Deficiencies/Liabilities Additions/Penalties
2004 $15,732 $N/A
STATUS OF CASE:
Probable Settlement: ___X__ Probable Trial_____ Definite Trial: ____
CURRENT ESTIMATE OF TRIAL TIME: ___________2 hours_______________
MOTIONS YOU EXPECT TO MAKE: (Title and brief description)
Motion for Production of Documents and Motion to Compel
Discovery
Motion for Summary Judgment
STATUS OF STIPULATION OF FACTS: Completed _________ In Process __X____
ISSUES:
Hearsay by CIR
Lack of Authentication by CIR and RoE issues
Amount of withholding is greater than the NOD states is owed
WITNESS(ES) YOU EXPECT CALL: (Name and brief summary of expected testimony)
Robert McMillan, CPA. Mr. McMillan has assisted Petitioner in several audits with the IRS and can provide expert testimony as to the amounts and sources of any monies as well as taxes that have been withheld and/or paid.
SUMMARY OF FACTS: (Attach separate pages, if necessary, to inform Court of facts in chronological narrative form)
Petitioner has deductions for charitable donations, credits for illegal telephone excise tax, deductions for tax return preparation expenses, Waiver of penalties, etc.
CIR figures do not reflect federal tax withholding, Social Security tax withholding, Medicare withholding
Petitioner is entitled to $50 refund of illegal telephone tax and waiver of penalties.
The income figures used by the CIR may possibly have come from illegal immigrants using petitioner's Social Security number.
Amount of withholding is greater than the NOD states is owed
BRIEF SYNOPSIS OF LEGAL AUTHORITIES: (attach separate pages, if necessary, to discuss fully your legal position)
Reconstitution of Records
The Cohen case shows that Petitioner can use reasonable figures, instead of figures that cannot be correct. Petitioner can also reconstruct lost paperwork to substantiate his deductions and business expenses.
The 9 th Circuit Court ruled in Cohen v. CIR, 266 F.2d 5; 1959:
“ We think our only proper course is to approach the problem indirectly by analysis of the record in the light of the principles established in Cohan v. Commissioner, 39 F.2d 540 (2d Cir. 1930). Our objective will be, after resolving any reasonable doubts against petitioner, to reconstruct his gross income as betting commissioner at a figure which in our judgment it would be unlikely to exceed in fact. (Petitioner, it is clear, has failed to establish a lesser amount.)”
More to be submitted later
EVIDENTIARY PROBLEMS:
Commissioner is planning to use Hearsay documents without authentication. Commissioner has not complied with discovery requests of taxpayer.
DATE: __________________ _______________________________
Petitioner
Return to: Judge Michael B. Thornton
United States Tax Court, Room 416
400 Second-Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20217
202-521-0766