Supreme Court of the United States

“ Due regard shall be given to the circumstance that the Special Trial Judge had the opportunity to evaluate the credibility of witnesses, and the findings of fact recommended by the Special Trial Judge shall be presumed to be correct.
Petitioner asserts that the "requirement that the Tax Court judge decide the case cannot be met if a deferential standard, and certainly not if a clear error standard of review, is used" (Pet. 11) . ”

“ The Rule does provide, however, that the Tax Court judge may "adopt the Special Trial Judge's report or may modify it or may reject it in whole or in part, or may direct the filing of additional briefs or may receive further evidence or may direct oral argument, or may recommit the report with instructions." It has long been recognized that the Tax Court has the inherent right "to make reasonable rules of pleading and practice for the orderly hearing and determination of cases before it" (Given v. Commissioner, 238 F.2d 579, 583 (8th Cir. 1956) ) . ”

“ App. 50a) . Petitioner sought review of the asserted deficiencies in the Tax Court. Acting under the authority provided by Section 7443A (b) (4) of the Code, the Chief Judge of the Tax Court assigned the case to Special Trial Judge Gussis for hearing and for preparation of a report (Pet. App. 49a) .
At the conclusion of the trial, Special Trial Judge Gussis submitted proposed findings of fact and a proposed opinion to the Chief Judge. The case was then assigned to Tax Court Judge Scott for disposition. ”