In an IRS enforcement action against defendant-Textron corporation, a ruling denying the petition for enforcement is vacated and remanded where, contrary to the ruling below, the attorney work product doctrine does not shield from an IRS summons "tax accrual work papers" prepared by lawyers and others in Textron's Tax Department to support Textron's calculation of tax reserves for its audited corporate financial statements.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND
Hon. Ernest C. Torres, Senior U.S. District Judge
Decided August 13, 2009
Judith A. Hagley, Tax Division, Department of Justice, with whom David I. Pincus, Robert W. Metzler, Attorneys, Tax Division, Department of Justice, John A. DiCicco, Acting Assistant Attorney General, Gilbert S. Rothenberg, Acting Deputy Assistant Attorney General, and Robert Clark Corrente, United States Attorney, were on supplemental brief for appellant.
John A. Tarantino with whom Patricia K. Rocha, Adler Pollock & Sheehan P.C., Arthur L. Bailey, J. Walker Johnson and Steptoe & Johnson LLP were on supplemental brief for appellee.
Professor Claudine V. Pease-Wingenter, Phoenix School of Law, on brief in support of appellee Textron Inc., Amicus Curiae.
David M. Brodsky, Robert J. Malionek, Adam J. Goldberg, Latham & Watkins LLP, Robin S. Conrad, Amar D. Sarwal, National Chamber Litigation Center, Inc., Susan Hackett, Senior Vice President and General Counsel, Association of Corporate Counsel, on brief in support of Textron Inc., Amici Curiae.