Kernan v. IRS, T.C. Memo 2014-228 (Nov. 3, 2014).
Tax denier cases (i.e. the IRS has no authority over me, so I’m not paying taxes) are entertaining for attorneys because of the crazy antics such litigants (often pro-se) pull. Monday's Kernan v. IRS, T.C. Memo 2014-228 (Nov. 3, 2014) is one such case in which the petitioner refused to pay taxes, citing IRC Sec. 6001 language which, to his credit, makes it sound like the IRS needs to serve notice of annual 1040 filing requirements before taxes are due from taxpayers. But any case in which a litigant refuses to obey even the court’s word limit stipulations is probably not going to go well for him. Mr. Kernan’s briefs were struck because he obliterated the 75 page limit despite agreeing to it before the judge. He prevented his own “novel” arguments from even being before the court.
Also notable from this case:
"Judges impose page limits for a reason. They force parties to hone their arguments and to state those arguments succinctly. Page limits cause, or should cause, parties to dispense with arguments of little or no merit in favor of those arguments that have a better chance of carrying the day. They encourage parties to avoid redundancy. And repetition.
"Parties often are quite creative in their efforts to circumvent page limits. Among the most blatant methods is to put material into an appendix and to not count that appendix as falling within the page limits. Another is to incorporate another document by reference. . . . "
See Full Disclaimer Below.
Copyright © 2014 E.F.M. Law Company, P.C.
All Rights Reserved.