We all know the rationale for Rule 155: Judges don’t want to be bothered with arithmetic. And lawyers notoriously can’t add; I’ve blogged that often enough.
Bradley Sharpe-Geisler & Valli Sharpe-Geisler, Docket No. 5460-19S, filed 6/25/19 are listed as pro sese, and neither seems to be an attorney. But neither they nor IRS’ representative from OCC seem able to figure out if Brad & Valli should lose their “S.”
And unlike that Obliging Jurist, Judge David Gustafson, Ch J Maurice B (“Mighty Mo”) Foley will not whip out his calculating engine to help them.
IRS moved to de-small Brad & Valli. Brad & Valli riposted, and IRS came back with something other and further on the subject.
Ch J Mighty Mo bears out my title.
“At this juncture, and despite the multiple submissions, suffice it to say that neither party has provided computational information that would clearly establish that the contested amount falls under $50,000. The $50,000 limit refers to the amount challenged, not the amount that will ultimately be owed. There may also be some confusion about the significance of various Tax Court procedures and designations. Petitioners are therefore advised that this case will proceed and that opportunity will be afforded for petitioners to present to the Tax Court evidence and/or argument in support of their position. The case will simply go forward here as a ‘regular’ case and will not be designated as a ‘small tax’ case.” Order, at p. 1.
It’s what number you’re challenging that decides whether you get your “S” handed to you, not the final number (which no one yet knows).
And don’t count on Ch J Mighty Mo to do your numbers for you.
You must be logged in to post a comment.