Paul Andrew, Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Counselor at Law and federal witness
c/o 2509 N. Campbell, #1776
Tucson, Arizona state, USA
zip code exempt (formerly DMM 122.32)

Under Protest and by Special Visitation
with explicit reservation of all rights



IN RE GRAND JURY SUBPOENA      )   Case No. GJ-95-1-6 (JMR)
SERVED ON                      )
                               )   DR. AND MRS. EUGENE BURNS AND
_______________________________)   DR. AND MRS. SHELDON DEAL

     In re:  the income  tax matters  of Dr.  Eugene A.  and Mrs.

Linda H.  Burns, Dr.  Sheldon C.  and Mrs.  Cindy  M.  Deal,  all

Citizens of Arizona state, and the New Life Health Center Company

(currently an  Unincorporated Business Trust company comprised of

four health food retail outlets).

                    Subject of this Affidavit

     The abusive  and illegal  tactics of  certain agents  of the

"Internal Revenue  Service" and  the United  States Department of

Justice employed against the People and the Trust listed above.

                        Years in Question

     Beginning January 1, 1978 and through and including December

31, 1995.

         Joint Affidavit of Dr./Mrs. Burns, Dr./Mrs. Deal:
                          Page 1 of 17

                    Purpose of this Affidavit

     This will  be an  effort to  explain, in the broadest terms,

the events of abuse which have continued for over 15 years to the

aforementioned persons.

                        Opening Statement

     Deal  and   Burns  are  licensed  Chiropractic  Doctors  and

business people  who have never been convicted of a serious crime

and who  have attempted  to conduct their personal business lives

according to  the laws  passed by  Congress and  enforced by  law

enforcement agencies.   They are conservative Republicans who are

active in  their community  and care  about  the  future  of  our

Country.  Contrary to the position of the IRS, Burns and Deal are

NOT illegal  tax protesters  as  otherwise  asserted  by  certain

agents of  the IRS.   Burns  and Deal have always preserved their

First Amendment Rights, as guaranteed by the Constitution for the

United States  of America,  to  voice  their  opposition  to  the

wrongful acts  of our government when, in their opinion, wrongful

acts have  been committed.  In the first place, to "protest" is a

fundamental Right  and, since  that it  is true,  then  the  term

"illegal" must  modify the  tax in  order for  this  term  to  be


     There is  no question that they entered into certain private

programs, subject  to the  review by  competent Counsel, with the

objective being  to preserve  assets, to limit tax liability, and

to conduct  estate planning.  They have always felt that this was

the pathway  to accumulating  wealth.   Little did they know that

the "programs" they joined would become the target of the federal

government,  and   thereby  plunge   them  into  a  whirlpool  of

litigation costing  hundreds of thousands of dollars and years of

constant harassment  by way  of a  blizzard of  audits and  court

appearances extending from 1981 to the present.

         Joint Affidavit of Dr./Mrs. Burns, Dr./Mrs. Deal:
                          Page 2 of 17

                        Counsel Employed

Cecil Hartman       Joe Izen  Bill Cohan     G. Singh Khalsa

John Standifer      Art Tranakos             Ralph Seifelt

Howard Feldman      Jim Schook, CPA          Jim Everett

            Government Agents Involved with this Case

     Justice Department:

     Steven Furth*       Bernie Knight*      Don Overall*

     "*" means Washington, D.C.

     Robert Johnson (Phoenix)      Rachel Zepeda (Phoenix)

     Internal Revenue Service:

     Melvin Martineau (auditor) Tucson

     Sharon Bennett  (auditor) Tucson (since left the Service)

     John Magee (auditor) Tucson (retired)

     Jeri L. Cantrell (Collection) Tucson

        Courts in which Burns & Deal Have Sought Remedies

     Tax Court  (twice), Federal  District Court,  Ninth  Circuit

Court of  Appeals, Supreme  Court and  finally  Bankruptcy  Court


                  Remedies Sought and Received

     To somehow  shift the burden to the government so that it is

they who  must prove  the amount of taxable liability due, rather

than Burns and Deal attempting to prove otherwise.  So far it has

not been possible.

         Joint Affidavit of Dr./Mrs. Burns, Dr./Mrs. Deal:
                          Page 3 of 17

                       Goal of this Report

     To somehow  put the pressure on the Department of Justice to

settle this  case.   To come  to a  legitimate tax  due which all

parties can live with and afford.  The Justice Department refuses

to settle  this case  under any circumstances.  At present, there

are liens and levies placed upon Burns/Deal and NLHC in excess of

$4,000,000!  Hardly affordable.


     In late  of 1977,  Burns and  Deal, accompanied by competent

Counsel (Howard  Feldman, tax  attorney,  and  Jim  Schook,  CPA)

attended a  week-long seminar conducted by Karl Dahlstrom  of the

American Law  Association.   At the  end of  this seminar, it was

determined by their Counsel that this would be a "legal means" by

which Persons  could  preserve  their  assets,  limit  their  tax

liabilities, and  plan their  estates.   Burns and  Deal filed  a

final tax  return for  New Life  Health Center  ("NLHC") (at that

time an Arizona Corporation) on December 1977.  The assets of the

Corporation were  transferred into  the Triple  Trust Program  (a

foreign trust  organization).   Other trusts  were set up at that


     Discovering that  the foreign  trust  arrangement,  although

adjudicated "legal"  by the  Ninth Circuit  Court of Appeals, was

not "acceptable" to the IRS, the assets of the foreign trust were

transferred (December  31, 1980)  to an  unincorporated  business

trust company  named   New Life  Health Center  Company ("NLHC").

The unincorporated  business trust  is a legal contract under the

Common Law of Arizona state (a Republic, by Law).

         Joint Affidavit of Dr./Mrs. Burns, Dr./Mrs. Deal:
                          Page 4 of 17

     Little did  they know that, during the subsequent Grand Jury

investigation of  Karl Dahlstrom  et al.,  there would  be an "ex

parte" meeting  with the office of the United States Attorney for

the Western  District of  Washington, and  the Office  of the Tax

Division of the U.S. Department of Justice.  A "Disclosure Order"

was issued by District Judge Barbara Rothstein purporting to find

a "particularized  need" for  breach of Grand Jury secrecy on the

part of the IRS.

     The Grand  Jury materials (especially the membership list of

the ALA)  was provided directly to the IRS for use in civil audit

investigations of  most, if  not  all,  of  the  members  of  the

Association.  It was so stated in a document obtained through the

Freedom of  Information Act that, armed with the membership list,

"the IRS could proceed with maximum impact."

     As a  result of  this  egregious  violation  of  the  Fourth

Amendment, a  suit was  filed in Federal District Court (a Bivens

type Action)  and summarily  defeated at  this level.   The Judge

ruled that  the government  has "sovereign  immunity."  In short,

they can  do any  damn thing  they want to do, and the Court will

uphold their illegal activities.

     As early  as 1981,  Burns and Deal were subjected to intense

audits for  the years  1978, 1979, and 1980.  Subsequent to these

audits, all  legitimate deductions  such as  wages and  utilities

were disallowed  from the  returns filed by Burns, Deal and NLHC.

A plethora  of 90-day  letters was issued on Burns, Deal and NLHC

(some  intentionally   sent  to   wrong  addresses)  the  alleged

deficiencies of  which totaled,  for all  parties, $3,819,479.42!

The total  adjusted gross income for Burns, Deal and NLHC for the

same period of time was $596,225.

         Joint Affidavit of Dr./Mrs. Burns, Dr./Mrs. Deal:
                          Page 5 of 17

     Prior to  the issuance  of the  Notices of Deficiency, Burns

was personally confronted by "agents" of the IRS who attempted to

intimidate him  with stories  of  a  criminal  prosecution  which

"they" had brought against some of the ALA members.  The "agents"

attempted to  indicate to  Burns that they "had the goods" on all

members of  the ALA  and that,  unless he (Burns) "cooperated" by

agreeing to  accept their  proposed deficiency,  Burns  would  be

subjected to  criminal prosecution  and  civil  seizure,  not  to

mention future  harassment.   Burns is  now convinced  that  this

conduct on the part of these "agents" of the IRS was extortion.

     Burns informed  the "agents" that the atmosphere of coercion

which they  exuded required  him to  stand on his Fifth Amendment

Immunity against  self-incrimination.  Apparently angered by this

response, and desiring to punish Burns, the "agents" proceeded to

issue Notices  of Deficiencies in amounts which had no reasonable

basis in  either law  or fact  and were at best arbitrary, capri-

cious, and unreasonable.  The facts which they presented to Burns

about his  personal and  financial affairs  could have  come only

from the  records illegally gleaned from the aforementioned Grand

Jury records.   Looking  back, it  is obvious that the government

agents were  committing  acts  of  extortion  and  conspiracy  to

violate the fundamental rights of Burns, Deal and NLHC.

         Joint Affidavit of Dr./Mrs. Burns, Dr./Mrs. Deal:
                          Page 6 of 17

     At this  time Burns  and  Deal  were  advised  as  to  their

extremely limited  choices:   either (1) pay the deficiencies and

sue in Federal District Court, or  (2) apply to the United States

Tax Court.   In both cases, they recognized that the legal system

had gone full circle and that they were GUILTY and must carry the

burden of  proving their  innocence.  Certainly, this is a defect

in the legal justice system that must be remedied in the future.

     It was  during the  1981 audit  period that  Burns and  Deal

recognized what  was happening  and attempted  to settle the only

real issue  of the  triple trust  arrangement, and  that was  the

so-called "contingent liability."  Burns attempted to settle with

the U.S. Attorney, Robert A. Johnson ... reverse the distribution

and compute the tax, penalties, and interest, and "we'll pay it."

     Johnson, however,  refused to settle the issue and, in fact,

stated that "This is not an issue of money (Dr. Burns), this is a

power issue.   We  intent on  putting you and your Company out of

business to make you an example."  Neil T. Nordbrock was there to

witness this  statement by Robert A. Johnson.  It seemed that the

entire motive  was to crush the membership of the ALA, as well as

Burns and  Deal, no  matter what  it took or what it cost, which,

for the most part, they have accomplished.

     Many times  both Burns  and Deal,  and their attorneys, have

attempted to  settle the  case.  In fact, Jim Everett has settled

many cases  (such as  ours) with  Bernie Knight (U.S. Attorney in

Washington, D.C.).   In an attempt to settle, Everett was told in

no uncertain  terms that  "the government  has  no  intention  to

settle with those tax protestors," or words to that effect.  They

have been met with the same negative attitude even after 15 years

of litigation.

         Joint Affidavit of Dr./Mrs. Burns, Dr./Mrs. Deal:
                          Page 7 of 17

     The only choice was to petition Tax Court.  The date set was

for November  2, 1987.   Prior  to this  date, the  IRS conducted

audits for  the calendar  years of  1980, through  and  including

1986.   Burns and  Deal were  subjected  to  weeks  of  intensive

interrogation (inquisition?)  with respect  to the  legitimacy of

deductions.   No matter  what justification  was argued,  the end

result was  that most  deductions were  summarily denied, thereby

creating as large a tax deficiency as possible.

     As the  tax court  date approached,  it was  determined that

Burns and  Deal would not get relief in that forum.  In fact, the

burden was too great to overcome, especially in light of the fact

that they  were being  "tried" by  a "Special" Judge (Payjak) who

was there solely for their case.

     At that time, the choice was made to file a personal Chapter

11 and  thereby stay  the Tax Court proceedings.  Little did they

know that  their attorney, John Standifer, had notified Robert A.

Johnson  (the   U.S.  Attorney)   of  their  intentions  (thereby

violating  the   Attorney/Client  privilege).     The  Bankruptcy

attorney, Ralph Seifelt, was confronted by several U.S. Attorneys

when he  went to file the petition.  They attempted physically to

prevent Seifelt  from filing  the petitions.   The  date for  the

filing was  on or  about October  28, 1987.  Seifelt successfully

filed  the  petitions;    however,  the  government  rousted  the

bankruptcy judge  away from  a weekend vacation and demanded that

the judge "lift the stay," which he did.

     In Tax  Court, Standifer  stipulated to the Court that Burns

owed approximately  $293,000, an  amount of  which Burns  had  no

knowledge whatsoever.   In  fact, Burns  did  not  discover  that

Standifer had done so until about a year later, when he was going

through some old files given to him by Standifer.  When asked why

he entered  the stipulated figure, Standifer replied that he felt

that this  was his  way of  "remaining in  good  faith  with  the

government."   Standifer also  went on  to say that "$293,000 was

better than  millions of  dollars."  It turned out that Standifer

was our worst nightmare.

         Joint Affidavit of Dr./Mrs. Burns, Dr./Mrs. Deal:
                          Page 8 of 17

     Burns and  Deal then  proceeded to  litigate  in  Bankruptcy

Chapter 11.   The  government moved  for more  audits, which they

were granted, and Seifelt moved for discovery on their part.  The

court granted  the motion;  the government refused to comply with

discovery;   and the  court never  enforced it.  Therefore, there

was no  way of  determining the  true tax liability.  So much for

justice.  Burns and Deal were forced out of Chapter 11 protection

on or about February 10, 1992, due to a pending conversion.

     Through the  use of  Freedom of  Information  Act  requests,

Burns and  Deal obtained  certain information  substantiating the

fraud that  had been  perpetrated upon them.  A suit was prepared

by our  attorney, Jim  Everett, and  filed  against  the  IRS  on

February 11,  1993,  alleging,  among  other  violations,  fraud,

embezzlement and  numerous Constitutional  violations.   See case

#CIV 93-0301  PHX (PGR).   After spending in excess of $20,000 to

prepare the  case, the  Judge granted  summary judgment  for  the

Defendants without so much as oral arguments or, for that matter,

any discovery.   In short, the Judge did not want to be bothered.

So much for equity in the courts.

     The only choice at this point was to re-file into Bankruptcy

Court.  Deal filed Chapter 11 (and remains there) and Burns filed

Chapter 7.   Burns  liquidated over  a half  a million dollars of

debt, most  of which  he never  owed.   NLHC was  forced  into  a

Chapter  11  (June  13,  1993)  when  it  was  learned  that  the

Collections Branch  was now  treating NLHC as a "hidden" asset of

Burns.   Rather than  let collections  ruin the business and give

Burns and  Deal a  chance to  argue the  issue of  ownership, the

trust  had   no  choice  but  to  file  for  protection.    After

approximately 13  months of  time, the  government still  had not

entered a proof of claim.

         Joint Affidavit of Dr./Mrs. Burns, Dr./Mrs. Deal:
                          Page 9 of 17

     After the  Judge granted  NLHC a  bar date,  the  government

moved for  a 90-day  extension,  during  which  time  they  could

"conduct their  investigation," despite  the fact  that they  had

plenty of  time to  do so.  The extension was granted.  It was at

that hearing  that the  Judge ordered  the United  States (Rachel

Zepeda) to  file a  Proof of  Claim ON  OR BEFORE May 23, 1994 at

5:00 pm  the terms of which appears in the transcript.  The Judge

was emphatic  about his order and even went so far as to tell Mr.

Everett to  proceed with a Motion to Dismiss if the United States

did not provide a timely proof of claim.

     The U.S.  Attorney ordered  all books and records pertaining

to NLHC  for the  years of  1989 and  through and including 1993.

Burns  and   Deal  were   then  put  through  another  series  of

interrogations and  depositions costing  a great deal of time and

money, not  to mention additional mental anguish and frustration.

The U.S.  Attorney failed to meet the bar date and  exceeded that

court-ordered date  by ten  (10) days.    Jim  Everett  proceeded

forward with his Motion, per the Judge's ruling.

     At the  hearing, the Judge asked Ms. Zepeda why she was late

in filing  the proof  of claim.   Her answer was, "We do this all

the time  your Honor,  and we  are very  busy" (or  words to that

effect).   The  judge,  however,  was  not  concerned  about  the

government's not  meeting the  time for  filing, and  granted the

extension based  on "excusable  neglect."   Everett then  filed a

Motion for  Reconsideration, which  was granted.   At  this time,

Everett introduced  a plethora of law on point.  The government's

response was  not only  weak, it  was also a sorry piece of legal

work.   It is  no wonder  that these  people go  to work  for the

government;  they could not make it on the outside.

         Joint Affidavit of Dr./Mrs. Burns, Dr./Mrs. Deal:
                          Page 10 of 17

     Several weeks  later, the  Judge ruled  for the  second time

against Burns/Deal  and NLHC  with a  remark, "No  one  has  been

injured."   One would  wonder what  it takes for a judge to be at

all concerned  that someone has "been injured."  We then filed an

appeal which  was assigned  to Judge  Jim McNamee.  On July 14th,

without a  great deal  of surprise, he sustained the bankruptcy's

judge's ruling.  An appeal to the Ninth Circuit was filed, and it

is still pending.

     Should we  fail all  of the  above, we have two choices: (1)

file an  adversary proceeding  which, in  effect, is  another law

suit against  the IRS,  with the  purpose of  forcing the  IRS to

prove ownership  of the  Company.   This would (of course) cost a

great deal  of  legal  fees  and  time.    Or  (2)  we  can  hire

independent business  appraisers to  evaluate the  value  of  the

business on a shut-down basis.

     The latter  option we  have done.   We hired two independent

appraisers (the  cost  of  which  was  approximately  $7,000)  to

evaluate the  business as  of June  13, 1993.   The value at that

time, according  to these appraisers, was approximately $111,000.

We then  can choose to stipulate as to ownership, introducing the

value of  the business  as a  settlement figure, and offer to pay

this amount as a settlement.

         Joint Affidavit of Dr./Mrs. Burns, Dr./Mrs. Deal:
                          Page 11 of 17

     The only  thing the  government can move to do is to object.

The Judge  should either  sustain the  objection, or overrule it,

and accept the settlement figure.  The problem is this:  can this

amount be  paid?   And, if the government forces the Company into

auction, this  could result in a loss of the assets of a business

Burns has guided for more than 25 years.

     Following the  "investigation" which occurred during the 90-

day extension,  Martineau of the IRS issued a 30-day letter dated

June  8,   1995,  disallowing   certain   (legitimate)   business

deductions for the taxable years of 1992 and 1993 (NLHC returns),

resulting in  additional taxes  of over  $60,000!!!   This latest

move leads  one to believe that there is nothing stopping the IRS

from further  disallowing business deductions for the years 1994,

1995, and  so on,  ad nauseam.   These  actions  will  eventually

collapse the  New Life  Health Center  and,  therefore,  a  long-

standing business which has been a benefit to the community, with

an excellent reputation.  But what do they care?


     On March  5, 1996,  a Grand  Jury subpoena was served on New

Life Health  Center to deliver all books and records for calendar

years 1990  thru 1995  to the  Grand Jury on March 27, 1996, 9:00

a.m.   This subpoena  was served  upon Richard Rineer, Manager of

one of  New Life's  retail stores  located at 4841 E. Speedway in

Tucson, Arizona  state.  The subpoena was defective in many ways.

Counsel for  the company  (Paul  Andrew,  Mitchell,  B.A.,  M.S.)

generated a  Privileged Communication  which was submitted to the

Grand Jury  Foreperson by way of registered U.S. Mail, restricted

delivery and  return receipt  both requested.    This  method  of

mailing  is  the  most  restrictive,  and  only  the  Grand  Jury

Foreperson could have signed for it.  As it turned out, by way of

a U.S.  Postal investigation, the Assistant U.S. Attorney, Robert

L. Miskell,  appears to  have intercepted the mail, and the Grand

Jury never received Counsel's Privileged Communication.

         Joint Affidavit of Dr./Mrs. Burns, Dr./Mrs. Deal:
                          Page 12 of 17

     Of course,  Mr.  Miskell  has  alleged  that  he  had  never

received the  Privileged  Communication  until  April  18,  1996.

Coincidentally, that  was the  date that the Postal investigation

was completed,  and also  the date that Miskell would have become

aware that  the Postal  investigation was underway.  Therefore, a

charge of perjury was filed by Counsel.

     Further, it  appears that Mr. Miskell is also guilty of mail

fraud, jury  tampering, contempt  of court,  and  obstruction  of

justice.  All of these charges have been briefed and submitted to

a list of participants, including District Judge John M. Roll.

     Subsequent to  a hearing  on an  Order to Show Cause why New

Life Health  Center and/or its General Manager should not be held

in contempt of court, Judge John M. Roll served upon Dr. Burns an

order to  appear in  front of  the Grand Jury on May 22, 1996, at

9:10 a.m., "with copies of the requested document" [sic].

     Burns did  appear on  that date  and attempted to deliver to

the  Grand   Jury  copies   of  the  Company's  Notice  of  Offer

Withdrawal, Petition  for Clarification, for Reconsideration, for

Writ of  Mandamus, and  for Orders  to Show Cause, with Exhibits,

all of  which was also mailed to the Grand Jury but never reached

them.   Now Mr.  Miskell has put in front of Judge Roll an "order

to strike"  certain crucial  pleadings, based  on the  absence of

licensed counsel.  Reply briefs are being prepared.

         Joint Affidavit of Dr./Mrs. Burns, Dr./Mrs. Deal:
                          Page 13 of 17

     It is  obvious to  us that,  since the civil side of the IRS

pursuit is  stymied by  the  bankruptcy,  they  have  decided  to

generate a  criminal case.   This  action  further  supports  the

original statement  promulgated by  Robert A. Johnson, wherein he

stated that  it was  the goal of the "Service" to put Burns, Deal

and New Life out of business and thereby make an example of them.


     It has  been our experience that the attitude of the IRS and

DOJ is  that whatever  People earn  really belongs to them.  They

will tell  you how  much you  can retain.   These agencies do not

adhere to  any of the laws enacted by Congress.  They can violate

any law  or Constitutional  provision and  be  supported  by  the

Courts,  Barbara  Rothstein  notwithstanding,  her  eminence  who

"prosecuted" the Karl Dahlstrom case in Washington state.

     History is  replete with  the  abuses  which  have  befallen

hundreds  of   thousands  of  decent,  hard-working,  God-fearing

people, attempting  to play  by the  rules on a non-level playing

field, with  the United  States charging  downhill.  If Burns and

Deal had ever realized what would happen to them by entering into

any program  for building  an estate  that is NOT approved by the

federal government, they certainly would not have done so.

     Since the  original audit,  they have  been billed  approxi-

mately $500,000  in legal fees to defend themselves against these

unreasonable people.   It  is incomprehensible how much money the

government has  spent on  this case.   It  is easily in excess of

whatever they could possibly realize in any kind of settlement.

         Joint Affidavit of Dr./Mrs. Burns, Dr./Mrs. Deal:
                          Page 14 of 17

     Had this argument been between two private parties, it would

have been  settled in  a heartbeat.  However, it seems that, when

the government  targets someone,  it  will  go  to  any  lengths,

including the  commission of  serious felonies  like mail  fraud,

perjury, obstruction  of justice, and jury tampering, despite the

obvious costs  and serious  damages to the Citizens.  There is no

question that both Burns and Deal desperately want to settle this

case and  get on  with their  lives.   We hereby  reserve all our

Rights without prejudice.

We witness each other, and further Affiants sayeth naught.

Executed on June 7, 1996

/s/ Eugene A. Burns                /s/ Linda H. Burns

Dr. Eugene A. Burns                Mrs. Linda H. Burns
Citizen of Arizona state           Citizen of Arizona state

/s/ Sheldon C. Deal                /s/ Cindy M. Deal

Dr. Sheldon C. Deal                Mrs. Cindy M. Deal
Citizen of Arizona state           Citizen of Arizona state

Exhibits available upon request.

              All Rights Reserved Without Prejudice

         Joint Affidavit of Dr./Mrs. Burns, Dr./Mrs. Deal:
                          Page 15 of 17

                        PROOF OF SERVICE

I, Linda  H. Burns,  hereby certify,  under penalty  of  perjury,

under the  laws of  the United  States of  America,  without  the

"United States", that I am at least 18 years of age and a Citizen

of one of the United States of America, that I am not currently a

Party to  this action, and that I personally served the following

                       JOINT AFFIDAVIT OF
                  DR. AND MRS. EUGENE BURNS AND
                    DR. AND MRS. SHELDON DEAL

by placing  said document with exhibits in first class U.S. Mail,

with postage  prepaid and  properly addressed  to  the  following


ROBERT L. MISKELL                  John M. Roll
Acapulco Building, Suite 8310      U.S. District Court
110 South Church Avenue            55 E. Broadway
Tucson, Arizona                    Tucson, Arizona

JANET NAPOLITANO                   Clerk
Acapulco Building, Suite 8310      U.S. District Court
110 South Church Avenue            55 E. Broadway
Tucson, Arizona                    Tucson, Arizona

Grand Jury Foreperson              Postmaster
In re: New Life Health Center Co.  U.S. Post Office
55 E. Broadway                     Downtown Station
Tucson, Arizona                    Tucson, Arizona

Judge Alex Kozinski                Evangelina Cardenas
Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals     "Internal Revenue Service"
125 S. Grand Avenue, Suite 200     300 West Congress
Pasadena, California               Tucson, Arizona

Attorney General                   Solicitor General
Department of Justice              Department of Justice
10th and Constitution, N.W. !      10th and Constitution, N.W. !
Washington, D.C.                   Washington, D.C.

Dated:  June 7, 1996

/s/ Linda Burns
Linda H. Burns, Citizen of Arizona state

All Rights Reserved without Prejudice

         Joint Affidavit of Dr./Mrs. Burns, Dr./Mrs. Deal:
                          Page 17 of 17

                             #  #  #

Return to Table of Contents for

In Re Grand Jury Subpoena