Attorney-at-Law

KNOW BEFORE YOU GO

In Uncategorized on 09/14/2021 at 16:50

The government travel slogan applies to practitioners entering Tax Court practice. A tour of the Tax Court website can provide helpful tips before you send out that engagement or retainer letter, or fire off that last-minute Form 2 as the sun nears the landline on Day 30 (or 90).

Even better, you might spare Ch J Maurice B (“Mighty Mo”) Foley the labor he expended on Samuel Sanders, Docket No. 21831-21, filed 9/14/21. It’s not Sam’s doing, but rather that of his trusty attorney, Jonathan McCormick, Esq.

“The petition filed to commence this case…lists the name of an individual who purportedly is petitioner’s counsel. The Petition bears the original signature of petitioner’s counsel, however, counsel is a practitioner who has not been admitted to practice before the Court, as required by the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure. If petitioner’s counsel wishes to be recognized as counsel of record in this case, it will be necessary at this juncture to electronically file an entry of appearance upon meeting all admission requirements pursuant to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure. An entry of appearance may only be filed by a practitioner who has been admitted to practice before the Court. The Court has prepared Q&A’s on the subject ‘Representing a Taxpayer Before the U.S. Tax Court[‘]. A copy of these Q&A’s are attached to this order. The Court also encourages practitioners and non-attorneys’ seeking admission to practice before the Court to consult ‘Guidance for Practitioners’ on the Court’s website at http://www.ustaxcourt.gov/practitioners.html.” Order, at p. 1.

Attorney Advertising: Indeed, the practitioner might even pick up a useful tip or two, or perhaps learn what to avoid, by a casual perusal of this my blog.

  1. I counted three of those orders today (9/15), and none of them involve lawyers. They are CPA’s in Texas, California and Alabama. Meanwhile, Mr. McCormick in this California case is an EA, with an MS in Taxation.

    And either they don’t know what they are doing, or they know exactly what they are doing. They have bought their clients at least five months to resolve a dispute with IRS. It took three months for the Tax Court to open the mail, notice the problem and serve IRS – which now has two months to answer.

    It would be an interesting assignment for a 1L to identify a dozen or so of these cases – then come back before law-school graduation and author a comment on how they turned out.

    Like

  2. Mr Kamman, I was unaware that Mr McCormick is an EA, not an attorney; Ch J Mighty Mo’s order led me to believe he is. i had not considered that he might be a USTCP. But that last makes his omission even more unusual. I wonder if the other representatives in the cases you cite are as crafty as you suggest. I did suggest that “we hip, battle-hardened practitioners know well that you file a petition immediately, whether or not you’re going to have the client send in a return, amended return, exchange billets doux with IRS, or anything else. You might omit the sixty Georges, and wait for Ch J Maurice B (“Mighty Mo”) Foley to tell you to ante up. But you need to protect the client while the matter gets sorted out. And 90 days wait for no one.” See my blogpost “Confusion Worse Confounded – Part Deux,” 2/4/21. https://taishofflaw.com/2021/02/04/confusio0n-worse-confounded-part-deux/

    Like

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: