In answering the questions below, refer only to Reimels v.

In answering the questions below, refer only to Reimels v. Comm., 2006-1 USTC ¶50,147, 97 AFTR2d 2006-820, 436 F.3d 344 (CA-2, 2006). This question is designed to develop your ability to find a given judicial tax law source and enhance your skills in interpreting judicial authorities that you locate while doing research.

Required:

After reading the case, write a clear, succinct but complete, grammatically correct, response to each of the questions posed below. The response should be a complete sentence or two (but no more than a short paragraph). Responses that are close, but not fully accurate or complete, will not get full credit. Also, be sure that your responses are labeled to correspond to the question numbers below. You must limit your response to no more than approximately one-half page. (If you fail to adhere to this limit, you will lose points.)

Your responses should be similar to item 2 on page 4.

(a) What are the names of the two petitioners-appellants?

(b) What is the relationship between the two petitioners-appellants (i.e., brother-sister, cousins, friends, etc.)?

(c) What is the name of the attorney representing the petitioners-appellants?

(d) What is the name of the specific appellate court that heard the case?

(e) What is the name of the trial court that originally heard the case?

(f) What is the name of the judge that wrote the opinion of the appellate court?

(g) What was the key issue/question that was presented to the appellate court? (Your response must quote the issue as

stated by the Court. In other words, your answer must be something like: The issue that the Court had to decide was

“whether [take quote straight from case].”)

(h) What did the appellate court hold with regard to the issue identified in (g)? (Your response must quote the holding as

Page 2 of 4

stated by the Court. In other words, your answer must be something like: The Court held that “[take quote straight from case].” Also, quote only from the Court’s opinion, not the “Headnote,” as this latter section is not technically part of the Court’s opinion. Finally, there is no need to explain the basis for the Court’s holding.)

(i) Did the appellate court affirm or reverse the decision of the trial court?

(j) Based on the appellate court’s opinion, who won the case, the petitioners-appellants or the respondent-appellee?