Opinion
26869-21
06-14-2023
ESTATE OF ROMAN J. FINNEGAN, DECEASED, KEVIN C. TANKERSLEY, PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE, & LYNETTE FINNEGAN, ET AL., Petitioners v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
Joseph W. Nega, Judge
These cases are calendared for trial at the special session of the Court scheduled to commence on August 14, 2023, in Indianapolis, Indiana.
On May 31, 2023, respondent filed a Motion for Order to Show Cause Why Proposed Facts and Evidence Should Not be Accepted as Established Pursuant to Rule 91(f).
In respondent's motion, respondent seeks an order to show cause as to why respondent's proposed stipulation of facts should not be accepted as established for the purposes of this case. Attached to respondent's motion is a proposed stipulation of facts. Respondent represents that to date, petitioners have not provided respondent any feedback on the proposed stipulation, or engaged in the stipulation process as required by T.C. Rule 91.
Rule 91(a) provides that parties "are required to stipulate, to the fullest extent to which complete or qualified agreement can or fairly should be reached, all matters not privileged which are relevant to the pending case, regardless of whether such matters involve fact or opinion or application of law to fact." If a party refuses or fails to confer regarding a stipulation or to make a stipulation, the opposite party may move the Court for an order to show cause "why the matters covered in the motion should not be deemed admitted for the purposes of the case." Rule 91(f)(1). When such a motion is filed, the Court will generally issue an order to show cause, which the directed party is required to respond to within 20 days of service. Rule 91(f)(2).
Consistent with the Court's rules, we will grant respondent's motion and thus direct petitioners to show cause in writing on or before July 5, 2023, as to why respondent's proposed stipulation of facts should not be accepted as established. Pursuant to the provisions of Rule 91(f), it is
ORDERED that respondent's Motion for Order to Show Cause Why Proposed Facts and Evidence Should Not be Accepted as Established Pursuant to Rule 91(f), filed May 31, 2023, is granted. It is further
ORDERED that, on or before July 5, 2023, petitioners shall file with the Court a written response in compliance with the provisions of Rule 91(f)(2), showing cause why the matters set forth in respondent's proposed stipulation of facts should not be deemed admitted for purposes of the pending case. If no response is filed within the period specified above with respect to any matter or portion thereof, or if the response is evasive or not fairly directed to the proposed stipulation or portion thereof, that matter or portion thereof will be deemed stipulated for purposes of the pending case, and an Order will be entered accordingly, pursuant to Rule 91(f)(3).