Judge Chiechi, Meet Judge Holmes

The issue here involved shows up in a bushelbasketful of orders, but for ease of reference, let’s eyeball Edward J. Tangel & Beatrice C. Tangel, et al., Docket No. 27268-13, filed 12/2/16.

Judge Chiechi has a bushelbasketful of protective order requests from the Tangels and the als, apparently due to IRS subpoenas served on third parties pursuant to Rule 147.

Y’all remember Rule 147, eh what? Well, as a great American once remarked, “you could look it up.”

Rule 147 don’t say nothin’ ‘bout tellin’ the other side.

Judge Chiechi: “A party that issues a subpoena under Rule 147(a) and/or (b) is not required to give prior notice to the other party.” Order, at p. 1.

Moreover, the IRS was genteel. “The Court finds under the facts and circumstances presented that respondent did not issue the subpoenas in question to harass, annoy, embarrass, oppress, or cause an undue burden on petitioners.” Order, at pp. 1-2.

So what?

FRCP 45 does require notice. And Rule 147 hasn’t been touched since 1973, long before the 1991 amendment to FRCP 45.

Gentility has nothing to do with it.

See my blogposts “Judge Holmes’ Vendetta,” 7/8/16, and “The Stealth Subpoena,” 7/16/15.

Maybe Judge Holmes and Judge Chiechi ought to get together for a cup coffee and a piece pie, and peradventure discuss bringing Tax Court into the last decade of the Twentieth Century, if not into the second decade of the Twenty-First.