*1 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.