T.C. Memo. 2010-165UNITED STATES TAX COURTPATRICIA DOWNS, Petitioner, ANDMICHAEL R. ALDRIDGE, Intervenor v.COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, RespondentDocket No. 20833-06. Filed July 28, 2010.Paul M. Kohlhoff, for petitioner.Michael R. Aldridge, pro se.Timothy S. Sinnott, for respondent.MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINIONGOEKE, Judge: Petitioner seeks review of respondent’sdetermination denying her relief from joint and several liability
- 2 -
1
Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are tothe Internal Revenue Code, and all Rule references are to the TaxCourt Rules of Practice and Procedure.under section 6015(f)
1
for taxable years 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995,1996, and 1997. At trial respondent abandoned the determinationdenying relief, but intervenor opposes relief. For the reasonsstated herein, we find petitioner is entitled to relief undersection 6015(f).FINDINGS OF FACTSome of the facts have been stipulated and are so found.The stipulated facts are incorporated herein by this reference.Petitioner resided in Indiana when her petition was filed, andintervenor resided in Tennessee at the time his notice ofintervention was filed. The couple, divorced in 2003, sharejoint custody of two children born of their marriage. Petitioneralso has a child from another marriage.Petitioner studied music education at Tennessee StateUniversity (TSU) but never studied business or accounting. Sheleft TSU after 1 year to work as a salesclerk and mail sorter.Petitioner was employed by LensCrafters when she marriedintervenor in April 1992 but quit before the birth of thecouple’s first child in November 1992. Petitioner remainedunemployed from 1993 through 1996. In 1997 she began working inreal estate.
- 3 -Intervenor owned and operated a carwash business, Glo Pro,before and during his marriage to petitioner. Althoughpetitioner assisted with Glo Pro occasionally, she had no formalrole or financial interest in the company’s operations.Intervenor participated in a second business, Pro Oil Corp. (ProOil), which began operating around 1996 and performed express oilchanges. Intervenor managed Pro Oil’s finances. Petitioner wasa 50-percent shareholder in Pro Oil, as was intervenor, and sheassisted with the company’s daily operations. She never receiveda paycheck or a Form W-2, Wage and Tax Statement, from Pro Oil.Intervenor stated that her interest in the company was conveyedto another party during a corporate meeting. The details of thisconveyance are both unknown and unnecessary for ourdetermination. In 2004 intervenor sold Pro Oil for approximately$400,000 and did not share the profits with petitioner despiteher efforts to recover a share of the proceeds.It was the practice of petitioner and intervenor to havetheir joint returns prepared by a professional tax preparer.Petitioner also relied on a paid tax preparer before her marriagewith intervenor. Petitioner was frightened of intervenor, who
Search History:
Result 00 of 00
00 results for result for
p.
More From This User
Notes
Load more
