Attorney-at-Law

RFC

In Uncategorized on 06/08/2018 at 17:15

No, this is not an essay concerning the predecessor to the UK’s Royal Air Force (1912 through 1918). It does concern an award, however. Rounder First Class is a title I award to a frequent pro se litigator and persistent protestor who has accumulated at least two (count ‘em, two) Section 6673 chops in a short period of time.

Today’s designee is Gary A. Bell, Sr., Docket No. 10625-17L, filed 6/8/18, a designated hitter from The Judge with a Heart, STJ Armen. But STJ Armen has scant sympathy for Gary.

“Petitioner is no stranger to this Court, having filed multiple prior actions, all to no avail. Respondent in his June 28, 2017 motion catalogs those actions, their outcomes, and their similarities to the present action. In sum, petitioner has been warned on numerous occasions, and he has also been the recipient of a penalty in one instance. Given petitioner’s failure to take those warnings and the prior imposition of a penalty to heart, and his persistence in uttering tax protestor rhetoric in the present case, the time has come to impose an even-greater penalty on him under section 6673(a)(1). The decision to do so is supported by the fact that the Court is convinced that petitioner instituted and maintained this proceeding primarily, if not exclusively, for purposes of delay. Having to deal with this matter wasted the Court’s time, as well as respondent’s, and taxpayers with genuine controversies may have delayed.” Order, at p. 5. (Footnote omitted, but it’s coming).

Ordinarily, a record like this would be necessary, but not sufficient, for RFC status. Gary, however, clears the bar, as the above-referred-to footnote makes clear. It refers to IRS’ catalog of Gary’s past activities.

“One update is required. Petitioner’s case at dkt. No. 27787-16 was pending at the time that respondent filed his motion in the present case on June 28, 2017. However, on July 31, 2017, the Court entered an Order And Order Of Dismissal For Lack Of Jurisdiction granting respondent’s jurisdictional motion and imposing on petitioner a penalty under section 6673(a) of $5,000. Petitioner did not appeal to the Court of Appeals. Although the Court’s dispositive order at dkt. No. 27787-16 occurred after petitioner commenced the present case, petitioner filed both of his Objections in the present case after entry of that dispositive order. Petitioner was therefore on notice regarding his frivolous positions, but he nevertheless persisted by advancing them once again in the present case.” Order, at p. 5, footnote 3.

Even though I didn’t blog it, check out that 7/31/17 order from STJ Armen, and compare it to today’s order. He’s got the form for a Gary order in his word processor. That clinches it.

Gary’s award of the RFC designation places him in the zone for the Scott F. Wnuck Award, named for the star of my blogpost “One’ll Get You Five,” 5/31/11, and petitioner in one of the most-cited rounder cases.

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

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

%d bloggers like this: