Attorney-at-Law

BLOWER ROUNDER?

In Uncategorized on 09/04/2020 at 18:43

I should know better than to express surprise at anything out of Tax Court. Honoré de Balzac, thou should’st be living at 3:30 p.m. Eastern, when The Glasshouse unleashes each day’s installment of your classic series.

No designated hitters or opinions, it being Friday, but John N. Magbual, Docket No. 7452-20W, filed 9/4/20, has six (count ’em, six) blower cases, all of like tenor. This aggregation lands on Ch J Maurice B (“Mighty Mo”) Foley’s workstation on a Friday before a three-day weekend.

To add insult to injury, John never anted the sixty clams for any of them. Nor did he redact name, rank, and serial number of the targets of any thereof.

Ch J Mighty Mo gives John the redaction letter.

“…when filing or lodging documents in this case in the future, the parties shall refrain from including, or take appropriate steps to redact the name, address, and other identifying information of the target taxpayer and, when appropriate, either (1) concurrently file or lodge under seal a reference list that identifies each item of redacted information and specifies an appropriate identifier that uniquely corresponds to each item listed or (2) concurrently file or lodge under seal an unredacted version of any redacted document that is filed or lodged. Documents filed under seal must be submitted to the Court in paper form.

“If utilizing the first method, the parties shall file or lodge redacted versions of documents accompanied by a reference list of redacted information, which must be filed or lodged under seal and specifically identify and state each item of redacted information (for example, when the target taxpayer’s name is redacted, the reference list must identify that redaction and also state the target taxpayer’s name). Subsequent references in the case to a listed identifier will be construed to refer to the corresponding item of information.

“If utilizing the second method, the versions shall be clearly marked as ‘Unredacted’ or ‘Redacted”, as appropriate, and the redacted version shall be an exact duplicate of the corresponding unredacted version, including attachments and exhibits, except for the redactions made with respect to the identifying information of the target taxpayer.” Order, at pp. 2-3.

And John, while you’re at it, file a proper amended petition, with lettered statements why the Ogden Sunseteers are wrong, and lettered statements of the facts you will adduce on the trial to prove they’re wrong.

And ante the sixty Georges.

All the above in three weeks.

I make the morning line 4 to 1 it doesn’t happen.

 

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 )

Connecting to %s

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

%d bloggers like this: