A dear friend, who is an Episcopal priest, has retired three (count ’em, three) times, and continues to serve as an assistant priest in his eightieth year. Is eighty the new sixty-five?

While Section 7447(b)(1) sets 70 as mandatory retirement for Tax Court judges, Sections 7447(b)(4) and 7447(c) allow for retired judges to take on senior status, in a fine example of “the large print taketh away, but the fine print giveth.”

So while Judge David Gustafson is not yet 70, should he at that age elect to retire from the Tax Court bench (which I hope he does not), he can always, if he chooses, find work as a kindergarten teacher.

Here’s an example: Inderpal S. Kanwal & Harpreet K. Kanwal, et al., Docket 23766-18, filed 11/12/21.*

“…the parties filed in each of these consolidated cases a First Stipulation of Facts, consisting of paragraphs numbered 1 through 101. On the same date they filed in each case a joint status report that states they ‘anticipate[d] filing a Second Stipulation of Facts and their respective cross-motions for summary judgment no later than November 17, 2021.'” Order, at p. 1.

As good as their word, the Kanwals filed a Second Stipulation of Facts, consisting of paragraphs numbered 1 through 3. Judge Gustafson expressed his appreciation of the parties’ cooperation and their work in readying their cases for disposition.

Gold Star?

Not quite.

He orders “…the Second Stipulation of Facts (Doc. 28), because the numbering of its paragraphs results in numbers that duplicate those in the First Stipulation of Facts, is deemed stricken, and that the parties shall file a revised Second Stipulation of Facts the paragraph numbers of which are sequential after the First Stipulation of Facts. If the parties hereafter file any additional stipulations, then they shall number the paragraphs therein sequentially after the previously filed stipulations.” Order, at p. 1.

Takeaway- Make it easy for the judge. Make it real easy for the judge.