For the timeline showing how Estate of Gladys Marie Randall, Deceased, Michele Collins, Independent Administrator, Docket No. 8271-24L, filed 7/13/26, slides under the time-out dismissal tag, see Order at p. 3. Michelle mailed her motion-within-a-motion (Motion for Leave to File Out of Time Motion to Vacate (Embodying Motion to Vacate)) within the Section 7481(a)(1) 90-day appeal timeframe, and IRS doesn’t object to filing the out of time vacation request part, but wants to fight over actually vacating the dismissal.

Clear? Thought not.

Judge Courtney D (“CD”) Jones doesn’t mention Rule 54(b)’s separate-checks, one request per motion, directive. Probably figured “no hurt, no foul, nobody looking anyway.”

So leave granted.

But before Michelle orders that magnum of ’09 La Grande Dame (which is a shame, as I’d love to help her drink some), Judge CD Jones calls off the party. The late Gladys Marie (before she became the late Gladys Marie) failed to allege equitable tolling when IRS moved to toss for late petitioning. Obviously the late Gladys Marie lived in one of the Boechlerized CCAs.

“Ms. Randall died… prior to the last day by which she was required to show cause why this case should not be dismissed for failure to state a claim on which relief can be granted…. and Ms. Collins had not yet been substituted as party petitioner. This fact tends to support the Court granting the Motion to Vacate. However, in the time since, Ms. Collins, in her capacity as the Independent Administrator of Ms. Randall’s Estate, has failed to comply with the Court’s Orders.

“In relevant part…, the Court ordered Ms. Collins to file the supplement to the Motion for Leave Embodying Motion to Vacate, specifying why respondent’s Motion to Dismiss should not be granted and providing information related to Ms. Randall’s health condition. Ms. Collins failed to file the response ordered by the Court. Likewise, Ms. Collins failed to file the Notice of Change of Address required by that same Order. Accordingly, in the light of petitioner’s failures to comply with the Court’s orders to provide information and supporting documentation, we will deny the Motion to Vacate.” Order, at p. 4.

Editorial comment: Taishoff says the Petitioners’ Bar that sang hosannas and popped the cans of store-brand lager (not for me, thank you) when the Supremes unloaded Boechler, P. C. didn’t read the fine print. Even Myer, the humble whistleblower begetter of Tax Court equitable tolling tohubohu (see my blogpost “For Whom the Equitable Tolls,” 4/10/20), was ultimately called out for want of diligence. And Antawn Jamal Sanders, whose filing was eleven (count ’em, eleven) seconds late, was timed out despite the efforts of the Fogg-bound Harvard LITC, because DAWSON’s creek flowed unvexed while Antawn’s computer froze him out.

 I’m still waiting for the first successful equitable tolling case.

Edited to add, 7/13/26: Maybe my wish will be granted sooner than I thought. Judge Goeke has decided to rule on equitable tolling in Scott M. Balotin & Ellen M. Balotin, Docket No. 3146-236L, filed 7/13/26.

“The Court will have jurisdiction to review the Notice of Determination only if petitioners can establish that the facts and circumstances of the late filing warrant equitable tolling of the deadline. We believe that it will advance resolution of this case to resolve whether equitable tolling applies. Accordingly, the parties will be ordered to file memoranda whether equitable tolling applies and we will extend the time for petitioners to file a Response to respondent’s Motion for Reconsideration as set forth in our Order… and direct petitioners to file a memorandum and supporting Declarations asserting facts relating to the reasons that they filed the Petition late and that equitable tolling applies.” Order, at p. 2.

And although I lamented that the Balotins’ last Tax Court excursion was a pro se exercise in futility (see my blogpost “The Eighty Percent,” 2/4/26), now they’ve got the FL Gators LITC leading the rush.

Judge Ronald L. (“Ingenuity”) Buch furnishes us with a timely order in Jeffrey A. Hartman, Docket No. 3517-25, filed 7/10/26.

Jeffrey has two (count ’em two) cases, but this one has Jeffrey claiming additional gigwork income and deductions not shown in the SND. And he furnished particulars thereof to IRS counsel. 

Whereupon, respondent “filed a Motion for Leave to File Second Amendment to First Amendment to Answer (doc. no. 39, which we will retitle), in which he sought to amend his answer to assert an additional deficiency. Mr. Hartman objects. Because Mr. Hartman will not be prejudiced by the proposed amendment, we will grant the Commissioner’s Motion.” Order, at p.1.

The retitiling is that the Second Amendment to First Amendment becomes the Second Amendment tout court. 

“There is no unfair disadvantage to Mr. Hartman. The Commissioner will bear the burden as to any new matters or increases to the deficiency. And Mr. Hartman already raised and has the burden to establish his expenses.” Order, at p. 2.

Of course, as Jeffrey has already handed IRS particulars of his income unreflected in the SND, IRS gets the Matthew 11:30 treatment.

If you remember either, you have to remember both, and to do that you’d need to be a card-carrying member of Medicare. But in their time, the age of the studio star system, everyone who was anyone in American movies read their columns before anything else. They were the Queens of Gossip, malicious and malign.

Believe me, I have no intention of joining that journalistic genre. So when I pass along overlooked or obscure happenings at The Glasshouse in the City All About Algae, I’m after truly newsworthy items.

So here’s a hot tip: we’re getting closer to a major opinion.

Judge Courtney D. (“CD”) Jones is lining up exhibits and briefings in Marc Lore and Carolyn Lore, Docket No. 8259-23, filed 7/9/26. You remember Marc’s famous Squawkbox moment with Walmart Pres and CEO Doug McMillon (a/k/a Doug McBillion). What, no? Then see my blogpost “Let’s Go to The Videotape,” 6/3/25.

Briefing done by end of November. As I noted back a year ago June, this must be quite a deal. “Seems the deficiencies for the two years at issue come to $15,656,849 and $6,946,309 respectively.”