Legal Opinion

Bernardo v. Commissioner

United States Tax Court

Decided June 20, 1995No. Docket No. 24694-93Published

R filed a motion to compel production of documents. Ps objected to the production of certain documents on the grounds of attorney-client privilege, work product, or both. As to Ps' claim of privilege, R contends that, because Ps' attorneys never engaged Ps' accountant, documents prepared by and received by Ps' accountant are not privileged.

Read the full summary

R filed a motion to compel production of documents. Ps objected to the production of certain documents on the grounds of attorney-client privilege, work product, or both. As to Ps' claim of privilege, R contends that, because Ps' attorneys never engaged Ps' accountant, documents prepared by and received by Ps' accountant are not privileged. As to Ps' claim of work product, R contends that documents prepared prior to the issuance of the notice of deficiency do not constitute work product because they were not prepared in anticipation of litigation. Finally, R, relying on Karme v. Commissioner,…

1Opinion of the Court

Bradford C. and Marybeth B. Bernardo, Petitioners v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Respondent

Bernardo v. Commissioner

Docket No. 24694-93

United States Tax Court

104 T.C. 677; 1995 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 36; 104 T.C. No. 33;

June 20, 1995, Filed

An appropriate order will be issued.

R filed a motion to compel production of documents. Ps objected to the production of certain documents on the grounds of attorney-client privilege, work product, or both. As to Ps' claim of privilege, R contends that, because Ps' attorneys never engaged Ps' accountant, documents prepared by and received by Ps' accountant…

2Cases cited41 opinions

  1. Hickman v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
  2. Upjohn Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
  3. Coastal States Gas Corporation v. Department of EnergyCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1980
  4. Couch v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
  5. United States v. Paul A. BilzerianCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1991

36 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API