Those who can’t proceed on their own, be it from youth or incapacity, get a boost in Tax Court from a guardian ad litem, to represent their interests. I leave the distinction between a next friend and a guardian ad litem to the law review writers, but take a peek at my blogpost “With Friends Like Him”, 2/26/13.

And see also Rule 60(d): “An infant or incompetent person who does not have a duly appointed representative may act by a next friend or by a guardian ad litem.”

Now Shawna A. Garg wants Mommy and Daddy to represent her, and asks STJ Lew (Love That Name) Carluzzo to let them in.

But Judge Lew needs more than the billet doux young Shawna sent Judge Lew in February, so see Shawna A. Garg, Docket No. 19263-12S, filed 5/1/13.

Show me, says Judge Lew: “In the February letter petitioner advises the Court that the petition in this case for the redetermination of a deficiency was submitted to the Court on her behalf by her parents. The letter goes on to advise the Court that petitioner ratifies the filing of the petition and requests that petitioner’s parents be allowed to represent her in this proceeding.

“Nothing submitted by petitioner or her parents suggests that either of petitioner’s parents is admitted to practice before the Court, see Rule 200, and we are unable to determine whether the circumstances contemplated by Rule 60(d) would apply to otherwise allow petitioner’s parents to participate in a representative capacity in this case.” Order, p. 1. (Footnote omitted).

So Judge Lew will treat the February letter as an amendment to the petition and as a motion for appointment of a guardian ad litem for young Shawna, but deny the motion without prejudice to young Shawna renewing her motion and showing she’s entitled to Rule 60(d) treatment.

I doubt her parents are admitted to practice in Tax Court.