I won’t be so bold as to assert that Judge David Gustafson reads this my blog. I doubt if he remembers that we met at the Tax Court Judicial Conference in Chicago eight (count ’em, eight) years ago. But he has taken up, with his usual diligence and obliging nature, the role of the Administrative Judge Tax Court ought to have.

Here’s a quote from my blogpost “Scrapbook 10/30/23. “Maybe the Ch J might adopt our State court procedure, whereby an administrative judge cracks the whip, requiring explanations why antiques are still in the shop, and bestirring the dilatory to stop dancing in the backfield, and move the football or eat the football.”

Judge Gustafson faces Robert Hersch & Katherine Hersch, Docket No. 13895-25, filed 10/23/26, head-on. “When the Tax Court ‘cuts’ a new trial calendar, it is appropriate for the assigned judge to look at the oldest cases on the calendar and to attempt to ensure that they are not allowed simply to languish. This case is one of the older cases on the calendar for the Tax Court’s upcoming session in Dallas beginning March 8, 2027. It concerns tax year 2019, for which the IRS issued a notice of deficiency more than three years ago on September 28, 2023 (Doc. 1, Ex. A).” Order, at p. 1.

After a trudge through the nearly-impenetrable procedural morass, Judge Gustafson observes that holding this case for eventual consolidation with a couple related cases (hi, Judge Holmes) involving later years won’t work because Section 6663 fraud chops in the relateds but not here.

So he directs the parties to stipulate whatever they can.

“It seems that this earliest case has had full consideration by Appeals, is unlikely to settle, and has had more than adequate time to be developed for trial. We would not expect to continue this case upon the vague ‘anticipat[ion]’ of a motion to consolidate, and we would not summarily grant any motion to consolidate but would evaluate it in light of the concerns expressed above.” Order, at p. 2.