Opinion
767-23
08-07-2024
LARNELL NOLAN, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
ORDER
Peter J. Panuthos Special Trial Judge
On January 30, 2023, petitioner filed the Petition. On March 22, 2023, respondent filed the Answer. On May 6, 2023, petitioner filed a Reply to Answer.
On April 21, 2023, petitioner filed a Motion for More Definite Statement Pursuant to Rule 51, a Motion to Strike, and a Motion for Leave to Conduct Discovery Pursuant to Rule 70(a)(2). By Order served June 5, 2023, the Court denied petitioner's motions filed on April 21, 2023, advised petitioner of the invalidity of his arguments, and warned petitioner that the Court will strongly consider imposing a penalty pursuant to section 6673(a)(1) should petitioner advance similar arguments in the future.
On September 26, 2023, petitioner filed a Motion for Leave to File First Amended Petition and lodged a First Amended Petition. By Order served December 7, 2023, petitioner's motion was granted in that the First Amended Petition was filed as a First Amendment to Petition and respondent was directed that he need not file a responsive pleading. On February 6, 2024, petitioner filed a Motion for Default and Dismissal. On February 8, 2024, respondent filed a Response to Motion for Default and Dismissal. By Order served February 12, 2024, petitioner's Motion for Default and Dismissal was denied. On May 29, 2024, petitioner filed a Motion for Answers to First Amendment to Petition. On June 10, 2024, respondent filed a Response to Motion for Answers to First Amendment to Petition, in which he notes that in the Order served December 7, 2023, respondent was directed that he need not file a responsive pleading. On June 21, 2024, petitioner filed a Motion for Leave to Move for Closure, in which petitioner sought 30 days to review respondent's Response and file a motion. On July 24, 2024, petitioner filed another Motion for Default and Dismissal.
On May 10, 2024, respondent filed a Motion to Compel Responses to Interrogatories, seeking for the Court to overrule petitioner's objections to interrogatory Nos. 1, 2, 6, 7, 10, 11, 12, and 13. Attached to respondent's motion was Petitioner's Response to Request for Admissions Interrogatories. Petitioner failed to respond to interrogatory No. 1 and objected to it on the ground that the term "services" is vague. Petitioner provided an incomplete response to interrogatory No. 2 and objected to it on the ground that the term "changed" is vague. Petitioner objected to interrogatory Nos. 6 and 7 as beyond the scope of discovery. Petitioner objected to interrogatory Nos. 10 through 13 as moot pursuant to Rule 90(c), Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure, and beyond the scope of discovery. Petitioner should note that Rule 90(c) addresses requests for admission, not interrogatories. On June 21, 2024, petitioner filed a Response to Motion to Compel Responses to Interrogatories, in which petitioner asserts, "in common law proceedings, interrogatories are not part of proceedings."
Section 6673(a)(1) authorizes the Tax Court to require a taxpayer to pay to the United States a penalty not in excess of $25,000 whenever it appears that proceedings have been instituted or maintained primarily for delay or that the taxpayer's position in such proceedings is frivolous or groundless. Section 6673(a) was designed precisely to deter the frivolity present in petitioner's filings in this case, which has caused the waste of judicial resources. Petitioner is admonished that the Court will consider imposing section 6673 penalties if he again files a motion that raises a frivolous or groundless position or which the Court concludes is filed primarily to delay the proceedings in this case.
The Court will order petitioner to fully respond to respondent's interrogatory Nos. 1, 2, 6, 7, 10, 11, 12, and 13, served on petitioner on April 8, 2024. In the event petitioner does not fully comply with the provisions of this Order, the Court will be inclined to impose sanctions against petitioner pursuant to Rule 104. Such sanctions may include (1) refusing to allow petitioner to testify regarding the subject matter of the interrogatories or to introduce documents related to the requested interrogatories as evidence at trial, (2) dismissing the case against petitioner, or (3) making any other order as to the failure as is just.
Accordingly, upon due consideration, it is
ORDERED that petitioner's Motion for Answers to First Amendment to Petition, filed May 29, 2024; Motion for Leave to Move for Closure, filed June 21, 2024; and Motion for Default and Dismissal, filed July 24, 2024, are denied. It is further
ORDERED that respondent's Motion to Compel Responses to Interrogatories, filed May 10, 2024, is granted in that petitioner shall, on or before August 28, 2024, fully respond to respondent's interrogatory Nos. 1, 2, 6, 7, 10, 11, 12, and 13, served on petitioner on April 8, 2024.