Opinion
10874-23
05-07-2024
JANICE M. JENNINGS, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
ORDER
EMIN TORO JUDGE.
This case is currently calendared for trial during the Court's June 3, 2024, New York, New York, trial session.
On May 3, 2024, at 2:15 p.m. Eastern Time respondent filed a Motion for Continuance of Trial (Doc. 22). According to respondent's Motion, "[o]n May 3, 2024, [r]espondent called [p]etitioner and left a voicemail requesting a return phone. Respondent is unable to ascertain if [p]etitioner objects to the granting of this motion."
Rule 50(a) requires that a motion "show that prior notice thereof has been given to each other party or counsel for each other party and shall state whether there is any objection to the motion." The point of the rule is to require parties to confer with each other before filing motions needing consideration by the Court. Doing so conserves judicial resources, for example, by identifying for the Court proposed actions that the parties agree on. But when prior notice is not timely given and the other party does not have adequate time to consider whether to consent to or oppose the motion, the consequence is a potential waste of judicial resources. Because the other party's views would be unknown, the Court might need to issue an order calling for that party's response and await that response before acting on the motion. All this can be avoided if the moving party provides prior notice of the motion in a timely fashion. Without addressing what might be appropriate prior notice for all motions, we note that, when it comes to a motion to continue, there seems to be no reason why prior notice could not be given well before the last date for filing a timely motion, thus allowing the other party time to evaluate how to respond and provide to the movant a response before the motion is filed.
In view of the foregoing, we will direct respondent to supplement the Motion to advise the Court whether now that a reasonable period has passed since the May 3 phone call petitioner has expressed any views to respondent concerning the Motion.
Upon due consideration, it is
ORDERED that, on or before May 10, 2024, respondent shall file a supplement to his Motion providing the information discussed above.