Now that the ice hockey season is over, the title or caption first above written at the head hereof (as my expensive colleagues would say) is no long applicable. It was never applicable in United States Tax Court, as Judge Adam B. (“Sport”) Landy makes clear in Ringer Road Rock & Timber, LLC, Ringer Road Manager, LLC, Partnership Representative, Docket No. 7123-24, filed 6/23/25.

The Ringer Road Rockers have nothing to do with this. Rather. IRS is trying a flying line change, on which Judge Sport Landy blows the play dead.

“Jordan S. Musen filed a Notice of Withdrawal for Catherine J. Caballero. That ‘Notice’ states that it was filed on behalf of Catherine J. Caballero. But that ‘Notice’ did not seek to withdraw the appearance of a counsel for respondent who has properly entered an appearance in this case. This Notice seeks to remove Ms. Caballero from among the counsel of record.” Order, at p. 1.

According to a quick docket search, apparently Jordan S. Musen was withdrawn as counsel for IRS back on 4/1/25, but maybe that was an April Fool’s joke. Howbeit, in or out, s/he is going about it the wrong way. Judge Sport Landy puts CatCab back.

“Rule 24(c) allows an attorney to withdraw by notice in limited circumstances, but that rule is clear, ‘Counsel desiring to withdraw as counsel may file a notice.’ It does not permit one attorney to file a notice and thereby remove another attorney. As a consequence of their filing of a Notice of Withdrawal of Counsel, Ms. Caballero was improperly removed as counsel in this case. Rule 24(c) provides three options for an attorney to be withdrawn from a case. As relevant here, Rule 24(c)(1) sets forth the limited circumstances in which an attorney can withdraw himself or herself as counsel. If those limited circumstances are not met, such as if one attorney is attempting to remove another attorney, then a Motion must be filed under Rule 24(c) v(2) or (3). Rule 24(c)(3) is captioned Motion to Withdraw Counsel by Party. In this instance, the attorney who filed the improper notice represents a party (respondent), and as counsel of record for a party, he may file a motion on that party’s behalf to have another attorney removed.” Order, at p. 1.

Taishoff says I suppose any attorney seeking to remove another attorney must at least represent a party for whom the attorney sought to be removed had filed EoA. And at the time seeking to remove the other, must him/herself currently have on record an EoA to represent that party. Remember, withdrawal by notice is not the same as withdrawal on motion. I covered this in my blogpost “Firm EoA – Again,” 5/5/25.