Free Response to Motion - District Court of Federal Claims - federal

Case 1:05-cv-00748-CCM

Document 34-2

Filed 03/05/2007

Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERA CLAIMS
STOBIE CREEK INESTMENTS LLC, JFW ENTERPRISES, INC., Tax Matters and Notice Partner, Plaintiff
Case No. 05-00748

v.

THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Defendant.

Written Statement Pursuant to ReI!. §301.9000-5

1. The paries to this action are listed above in the caption. Plaintiffs fied this
action to contest the Notice of Final Partnership Administrative Adjustment dated March 9,

2005. Attached hereto as Exhibit A, is a copy of the complaint. Plaintiffs seek a
redetermination of the FP AA to remove all adjustments to income, losses, distributions, basis,
and penalties; a recovery of the amount of

taxes deposited (plus any interest permitted by law)

in escrow; and any other relief

which Plaintiffs may be justly entitled.

2. The following are the subjects with respect to which Plaintiffs seek testimony:

(a) Discussions durng a meeting on or about Januar 9, 1995 between any

of Monte Jackal, Nelson Crouch and Richard Starke relating to the interpretation of Internal
Revenue Code Section 752;
(b) Discussions during a meeting on or about March 7, 1995 between Stuar
Brown and Richard Starke relating to the interpretation of

Internal Revenue Code Section 752;

(c) Discussions durng a meeting on or about April 4, 1995 between any

of

Victor Penico, John Rooney and Richard Starke relating to the interpretation of Internal
Revenue Code Sections 752, 357 and 358;
(d) Richard Starke's interpretation of Internal Revenue Code Section 752 to

options to deliver property in Helmer v. United States, T.C. Memo 1975-160,34 T.C.M. 727
(1975).
(e) Richard Starke's involvement with respect to the drafting or
interpretation of

Revenue Ruling 95-45.

Case 1:05-cv-00748-CCM

Document 34-2

Filed 03/05/2007

Page 2 of 2

(f) Any documents produced in the Jade Trading, LLC v. U.S., Case No.

03-2164.
3. The time required to present the testimony would be no longer than 7 hours,

pursuant to RCFC 30(d)(2).
4. The information sought is not return or retu information, nor tax convention

information.
5. A declaration of an IRS officer, employee, or contractor under penalties of
peijury would not suffce in lieu of deposition testimony. The subjects of testimony sought

extend beyond authenticating documents. Therefore, deposition testimony is required.
6. The information and documents sought are not available from other sources.

7. The demand allows a reasonable time (15 business days) for compliance.

Dated: January 10, 2007

Respectfully Submitted

SCHIFF HARIN LLP

E4 rV7'-Attorneys for Plaintiff
Robert E. Kolek Thomas R. Wechter Colleen M. Feeney

SCHIFF HARIN LLP
6600 Sears Tower Chicago, IL 60606
Phone: 312-258-5500 Fax: 312-258-5600
CHI \ 4809982.2