That Obliging Jurist Judge David Gustafson has no trouble with the concept in Sara Bareilles’ and Jack Antonoff’s 2013 digital hit “Brave”, but he does insist that, when you “say what you wanna say, and let the words fall out,” if you’re making a motion in Tax Court, you should follow Rule 50(a) and “state with particularity the grounds therefor.”

In other words, if you want something, say something. See my blogpost so entitled, 4/4/14.

Moreover, tell the Judge precisely why you’re entitled to the something you’re asking for, citing names, dates, amounts, and places, attaching copies of documents; and maybe accompany your motion with a memorandum of applicable law and regulations.

The lawyer for Ricky J. Evans, Docket No. 16602-13L, filed 5/2/14 did none of the above, and therefore earns a mild rebuke from Judge Gustafson.“This case involves the collection of trust fund recovery penalties under section 6672 for seven calendar quarters. Petitioner’s one-paragraph motion alleges that ‘Payments that had been misapplied by the IRS payment system have been successfully identified and applied to the appropriate trust taxes’ and asks us to dismiss the case (apparently on ground of mootness). The motion does not identify payment amounts or taxable periods and is not accompanied by any affidavit, documentation, or other factual support.” Order, at p. 1.

Not a good start, and IRS is all over Ricky J. and counsel. “…respondent filed an opposition to the motion, asserting that for the liabilities at issue, balances remain unpaid. To the opposition, respondent attached copies of transcripts of account for the seven periods at issue, showing balances due totaling more than $250,000.” Order, at p. 1.

Judge Gustafson gently refers Ricky J.’s counsel to Rule 50(a). And bounces his motion.

So, while he may “wanna see ya be brave”, Judge Gustafson would like you to throw in some particulars if you’re asking him for something.