Attorney-at-Law

TAKING THE BOOKIES’ MONEY

In Uncategorized on 01/03/2022 at 09:05

I am not without scruples. Though I made the morning line 3 to 1 that “highly contestable readings of what it means to be perpetual” would founder in 6 Cir (see my blogpost “They Always Must be With Us,” 5/12/20), I had no bet on, as it would be taking the bookies’ money.

Well, my colleague Peter Reilly, CPA, informed me that 11 Cir had put paid to perpetual motion in Hewitt v Com’r, No. 20-13700, 12/29/31. Mr Reilly asked whether I’d blog the decision on appeal. I usually don’t blog appeals, because the trade press and the blogosphere jump on the CCAs and USDCs, and I’m left fishing behind the net. I also don’t want an inference to arise that I have any obligation to update my blogposts. These are essays, not legal opinions. Use, if at all, wholly at your own risk.

But Mr Reilly turned up some political commentary, claiming judicial misconduct. Arrant nonsense; proof once again that Lord Chief Justice Campbell was right: “There is nothing so dangerous as for one not of the craft to tamper with our freemasonry.”

Allow me to stress that Dave Hewitt’s appraisers beat IRS’. And that Dave didn’t flog pieces of his deal to dodge-hungry highrollers. And Dave raised the Administrative Procedures Act below, to contest the “highly contestable reading” by Judge Goeke.

You can read 11 Cir’s decision for yourselves, but Judge Richard Posner, late of 7 Cir, got it right. “I pay very little attention to legal rules, statutes, constitutional provisions. … A case is just a dispute. The first thing you do is ask yourself—forget about the law—what is a sensible resolution of this dispute? The next thing … is to see if a recent Supreme Court precedent or some other legal obstacle stood in the way of ruling in favor of that sensible resolution. And the answer is that’s actually rarely the case. When you have a Supreme Court case or something similar, they’re often extremely easy to get around.”

Judge Holmes got it right in his dissent in Oakbrook. The phony easements, be they scenic, conservation, or façade, are phony because overvalued. Tax Court is the valuation court par excellence. Don’t throw out the legitimate deals because the wiseguys play games.

 

  1. […] Taishoff has Getting The Bookies’ Dollars. He was delighted with himself for obtaining predicted the outcome. I had requested him about […]

    Like

  2. […] Taishoff has Taking The Bookies’ Money. He was pleased with himself for having predicted the outcome. I had asked him about LIF’s […]

    Like

  3. […] Taishoff has Taking The Bookies’ Money. He was pleased with himself for having predicted the outcome. I had asked him about […]

    Like

  4. Yes, I am pleased (or delighted, depending upon which plagiarist you read). But I pointed out more than once it was Judge Holmes’ dissent in Oakbrook that set it all out. I do not claim originality.

    Like

  5. […] Taishoff has Taking The Bookies’ Money. He was pleased with himself for having predicted the outcome. I had asked him about LIF’s […]

    Like

  6. […] Taishoff has Taking The Bookies’ Money. He was pleased with himself for having predicted the outcome. I had asked him about LIF’s […]

    Like

Leave a Reply to Eleventh Circuit Deals IRS Defeat In Conservation Easement Struggle – THE MIRROR OF MEDIA Cancel 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 )

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: