Vinick v. United States , 205 F.3d 1 ( 2000 )


Menu:
  •           United States Court of Appeals
    For the First Circuit
    No. 98-2143
    ARNOLD W. VINICK,
    Plaintiff, Appellant,
    v.
    UNITED STATES,
    Defendant, Appellee.
    APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
    FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
    [Hon. Robert E. Keeton, U.S. District Judge]
    ERRATA SHEET
    The opinion of this Court issued on March 8, 2000, is
    amended as follows:
    Page 20, line 9: Add a new footnote number “8” after the
    period ending the sentence: “Responsibility during one period
    does not equate to responsibility in all periods.”
    The text for the new footnote 8 is as follows: “We do not
    mean to suggest that in all § 6672 cases a district court is
    precluded from considering evidence from outside the quarters in
    question. For example, behavior in one quarter, depending on
    the circumstances, could cast light on one's status as a
    responsible person in other quarters. Because one's function
    and status can change between quarters, however, it would be
    erroneous   based   solely  on   evidence   from   one   quarter
    automatically to conclude that a person is responsible in
    another quarter.”
    Alter   the   subsequent   footnotes'   numbering   accordingly.