In Uncategorized on 01/13/2022 at 13:27

I wasn’t wrong back in September, 2020, when I awarded Judge Christian N. (“Speedy”) Weiler that cognomen. Today he gives us an off-the-bencher that is as short and swift as any, Teresa G. Murphy, Docket No. 13970-19, filed 1/13/21.

Teresa’s been in Tax Court before on the very same issue, and lost 2019 T. C. Sum. Op. 32, filed 10/15/19, which I didn’t blog. It involved the Section 86 Social Security Retirement vs SSDI vs State or employer disability payments.

So does this case, but for a different year, wherefore Judge Speedy Weiler tosses Teresa again with a couple sentences summary (hi, Judge Holmes) of the issue.

IRS wants Section 6673 frivolity-delay chops. Judge Speedy Weiler says no, but he doesn’t tell us why. Was it just because, though Teresa had tried the same argument in another year and lost, she had not been warned by Judge Nega?

I wish Judge Speedy Weiler had given us some insight into what earns Section 6673 frivolity chops.

I quote Judge Buch in Waltner 2014 T. C. Memo. 35, filed 10/27/14: “Judicial opinions serve many purposes: they assist attorneys in advising clients and preparing cases; they provide the lower court’s rationale when the appellate court must evaluate its decision; they inform the public of the court’s analysis; and they establish clear and articulate rules for the future.” 2014 T. C. Memo. 35, at pp. 24-25. (Footnote omitted).

I don’t expect law review articles in off-the-benchers, but a few words why no chops for Teresa would be enlightening.


Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your 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: