Attorney-at-Law

LOSE YOUR CASE AT DISCOVERY

In Uncategorized on 12/07/2016 at 16:01

Some mothers do ‘ave ‘em, as the old English slogan goes, but the STJs at 400 Second Street, NW, get more than their share.

And today STJ Lewis (“The Name”) Carluzzo has a pair of designated hitters.

Start with a return by Bruce Edward Haddix & Rae Anne Haddix, Docket No. 7385-16L, filed 12/7/16. Bruce & Rae were last here in my blogpost “No Deus, Much Machina,” 11/18/15.

I’m rather surprised Bruce & Rae are back, as you can see from the abovecited blogpost they had accused Tax Court of participating in a fraud. Howbeit, they seem to have discovered the subpoena, and have served the same far and wide, even before the Branerton play-nice, interrogs and document productions.

Apparently there’s less than a billion bucks on the table, and the third parties subpoenaed seem to have little to do with the matter at hand.

“More problematic, however, is petitioners’ attempts to use the Court’s Rules to obtain information that seems to have no bearing on the issues typically involved in proceedings such as this one. This is true with respect to each moving party. The individuals/moving parties apparently have some prior employment related connection with at least one of the petitioners, but the relationship of each of those individuals with respect to the underlying liabilities or the proposed collection action here in dispute is hardly apparent. As demonstrated in this case and at least one other previously dismissed Tax Court case, petitioners’ apparent propensity to issue and have served subpoenas upon individuals for information that hardly seems reasonably calculated to lead to admissible evidence in a Tax Court proceeding is an abuse of the Court’s Rules. See Rule 70(b). It would be improper for the Court to allow this practice to continue unchecked.” Order, at p. 2.

So no subpoenas on third parties without leave of Court, whether or not IRS agrees, with sanctions and costs to follow.

Next up is Chastity Kirven, Docket No. 30393-15W, filed 12/7/16, again a repeat performance (see my blogpost “Honey, I Shrunk the Kids,” 6/17/16).

As Chas won’t stip with IRS for a protective order before IRS gives her the Section 6103 material she wants, STJ Lew decides that allowing limited discovery is premature.

“…the Court indicated that it was inclined to allow petitioner limited discovery as requested in her opposition to respondent’s motion for summary judgment…and her motion for discovery…. However, upon further consideration…allowing discovery at this stage of the proceedings without some suggestion of a factual dispute would seem to be little more than an inappropriate ‘fishing expedition’, not to mention contrary to the Court’s requirement that the parties informally consult or communicate before discovery is initiated. See Rule 70(a); Branerton Corp. v. Commissioner, 64 T.C. 191 (1975). Petitioner is entitled to present information that challenges the statements contained in the declaration, and she will be given an opportunity to do so.” Order, at pp.1-2.

So Chas gets to put in credible information why IRS is wrong.

But STJ Lew has some advice for Chas that it would be well to heed.

“…petitioner objected to scheduling multiple motions for hearing on the same day, and she has repeatedly challenged the jurisdiction of a special trial judge to act in this case. At the hearing the Court noted for the record the provisions of I.R.C. §7443A(b)(6) and (c), which upon assignment by the chief judge, specifically grants jurisdiction in cases such as this one to a special trial judge. In many of her filings petitioner has also relied upon inapplicable provisions of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure in her opposition to the assignment of the motions here under consideration to the undersigned. She would be well advised to review the transcript of the hearing so as to be better informed as to the merits, or lack thereof, of many of her positions.” Order, at p. 1, footnote 1.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Google+ photo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

w

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: