In Uncategorized on 03/26/2015 at 16:17

No, I didn’t, but Eugenio Espinoza Martinez, Docket No. 29472-12, filed 3/26/15, gets a ticket in the Taishoff no-prize “good excuse” sweepstakes. Eugenio is going for the superfecta.

For those of my readers, that small but mighty band, who are strangers to the dirt and turf, the superfecta is a wager wherein the bettor must choose the precise order of finish of the first four horses to finish the race.

And from whom else should he get his ticket but The Great Dissenter, a/k/a The Judge Who Writes Like a Human Being, s/a/k/a the Indomitable, Irrefragable, Illustrious, Indefatigable, Incomparable, Implacable (but never Inconsiderate or Impetuous) Foe of the Partitive Genitive, Judge Mark V. Holmes?

Eugenio was supposed to show up before Judge Holmes in the Alamo City last Fall, but couldn’t make it. “(Since he will be an inmate in the Texas State prison system for the next decade his nonappearance is understandable.)” Order, at p. 1.

So IRS hits Eugenio with a Rule 91(f) “we declare these truths to be self-evident” motion, requiring Eugenio to dispute, rebut, counter and otherwise deal with the asserted facts therein.

Eugenio replies that the warden took his documents and won’t give them back. Not bad.

As they say on late-night television commercials, “But wait–there’s more!”

Judge Holmes searches the record and finds Eugenio has asserted the following during the last three years.

“…the records necessary to decide this case on the merits were either (a) nowhere to be found; (b) waiting for him when he returned to his unit of assignment when he was released from a mental health unit; (c) lost when his mother died; and (d) seized by guards from his cell.” Order, at p. 2.

Oh yes, Eugenio never provided one piece of evidence as to any of the foregoing.

Nevertheless, I give Eugenio an entry in the Taishoff no-prize “best excuse” sweepstakes Superfecta.

Kindly Judge Holmes gives him one last chance, because it’s tough to litigate from the slammer. So Eugenio, respond to the Rule 91(f) in early May, or you may find that the facts will be deemed established.

Footnote– Eugenio tried yet another stall, but Judge Holmes forestalled him, and “deems these truths to be self-evident.”  See Eugenio Espinoza Martinez, Docket No. 29472-12, filed 9/8/15. Oh yes, and IRS should move for summary J based upon said facts.


Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: