Opinion
7690-21S
08-10-2022
MARIA ESPINOZA, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
ORDER AND DECISION
Peter J. Panuthos Special Trial Judge.
By Notice dated September 9, 2021, this case was calendared for trial at the Court's Dallas, Texas remote trial session which commenced on January 24, 2022. On January 3, 2022, respondent filed a status report advising that the parties had reached a basis of settlement in this matter. The Court directed the parties to filed settlement documents by March 25, 2022.
On March 25, 2022, respondent filed a further status report advising that the proposed stipulated decision document had been sent to petitioner but there was no response from petitioner. On July 27, 2022, respondent filed a Motion To Dismiss For Lack of Prosecution indicating that respondent has made multiple attempts to procure an original signed decision document. The Court notes that the proposed stipulated decision (attached to the motion as Exhibit A) indicates that there is no deficiency due from petitioner.
The Court is unsure as to why petitioner has failed to sign and return the Proposed Stipulated Decision, however the Court is satisfied that the parties intended to settle this matter as set forth in the Proposed Stipulated Decision attached to the above-referenced motion as Exhibit A. The Court is satisfied that petitioner has failed to follow instructions from the Court and that respondent's motion should be granted.
Upon due consideration, it is
ORDERED that respondent's above-referenced motion is granted and this case is dismissed for lack of prosecution. It is further
ORDERED AND DECIDED that there is no deficiency due from, nor overpayment due to, petitioner for taxable year 2018.