From the Casebook of Lew Taishoff
I’m thinking of starting a casebook, assembling all the cases from blogposts past where the odd and unusual are on the menu.
Today I’ve got a case where DAWSON is the perp, The Case of the Disappearing Appearances.
Formerly, under the old and much-lamented no-name system, the docket sheet showed appearances. If petitioner were self-represented, that showed. If counsel filed the petition, or entered appearance thereafter, that showed. And IRS’ counsel was shown as soon as assigned.
That enabled me to call out dubious practitioners and sharp practice, and to praise those who did well, strove diligently, and generally took one for the side.
And it might have served as a referral service for pro ses in above their depth and looking for cover.
But the new, improved (ya gotta be kiddin’), jazzy, jim-handy DAWSON eliminated all that, and anonymity reigns.
If there is a reason for this obscurantism, it entirely escapes me.
Edited to add, 4/10/21: The appearances are there. There is a Release Note dated 3/7/21 that states appearances are to be found on the printable version of the docket sheet. But why the same information cannot be found on the docket sheet itself eludes me.
Where did all the appearances go to?
Trash can?
Why was this done?
Kp
LikeLike
Mr Pillich, Trust me, if I knew, I’d tell you (and everybody else). You might wish to direct your inquiries to dawson.support@ustaxcourt.gov
LikeLike
[…] Mr. Taishoff’s blog site has a variety of other DAWSON complaints. There is The Situation Of The Disappearing Look […]
LikeLike
[…] Mr. Taishoff’s blog has a number of other DAWSON complaints. There is The Case Of The Disappearing Appearance […]
LikeLike
[…] Mr. Taishoff’s blog has a number of other DAWSON complaints. There is The Case Of The Disappearing Appearance […]
LikeLike
[…] Mr. Taishoff’s blog has a number of other DAWSON complaints. There is The Case Of The Disappearing Appearance […]
LikeLike