Opinion
20894-19 6791-20 10830-20 17749-21 17771-21
01-04-2023
NOEL M. PARDUCCI & KENNETH L. PARDUCCI, ET AL., Petitioners v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
ORDER
Ronald L. Buch Judge
These five cases have been consolidated for trial, briefing, and opinion. Dennis Simpson, petitioner in docket no.17771-21 and trustee of the petitioner in docket no. 17749-21, submitted requests for admissions to Jeffrey and Lori Hoyal, petitioners in docket no. 6791-20, and Crater Lake Trust, petitioner in docket no. 10830-20. The Hoyals and Crater Lake Trust filed a Motion for Protective Order, alleging that Mr. Simpson failed to comply with the requirement that "the parties . . . attempt to attain the objectives of such a request through informal consultation or communication before utilizing the procedures" for requesting admissions. Rule 90(a). They further argue that Mr. Simpson is seeking admissions for purposes outside this litigation.
As to this last item, we will simply refer the parties to the explicit text of Rule 90(a), which provides, "A party may serve upon any other party a written request for the admission, for purposes of the pending action only, of the truth of any matters which are not privileged and are relevant to the subject matter involved in the pending action." (Emphasis added.) Under the express terms of Rule 90(a), admissions may only be used in the pending actions. The phrase "for purposes of the pending action only" is a limitation on the use of admissions, not the scope of admissions. In contrast, the phrase "relevant to the subject matter involved in the pending action" limits the scope of the matters that may be the subject of admissions. As the Hoyals and Crater Lake note in their motion, this case involves allegations of fraud, which takes into account all facts and circumstances. This may include a broad inquiry into the course of conduct before the years in issue and during an IRS examination. The Hoyals and Crater Lake failed to establish that Mr. Simpson's request falls outside that broad scope.
There is one category of admission often requested by Mr. Simpson, however, that is unduly burdensome. Many of the requests merely ask the Hoyals and Crater Lake to admit to the contents of documents. Documents speak for themselves, and it is unduly burdensome to ask a party merely to verify that Mr. Simpson has properly restated the contents of a document. For any requests that ask a party to admit to the contents of a document, the Hoyals and Crater Lake may merely respond with "Any such document speaks for itself."
As for the allegation that Mr. Simpson did not adequately pursue the objectives of admissions through informal means, at this time, we will not force Mr. Simpson to restart the admissions process. The Hoyals and Crater Lake are correct that the Court generally expects parties to pursue the objective of admissions through informal means. Rule 90(a). They are incorrect, however, in their reference to the cutoff for informal discovery in this case. See Order served October 3, 2022. While it is true that the time for informal discovery ended on October 31, 2022, admissions are not discovery. Compare Title VII with Title IX, Tax Court Rules of Practice & Procedure. While the parties may have intended that "informal discovery" include informal attempts at requests for admissions, the schedule suggested by the parties and adopted by the Court is not clear. We will not hold Mr. Simpson, appearing pro se, to a vague deadline. The deadline for requests for admissions in this case is January 13, 2023. If we were to force Mr. Simpson to restart the admission process, we may well find ourselves in the same position with respect to a newly re-served set of requests for admissions.
To keep this case progressing toward trial, we will not order Mr. Simpson to respond to the Hoyal's and Crater Lake's motion. Instead, it is
ORDERED that the Clerk shall file the Motion for Protective Order electronically filed at index 84 in docket no. 6791-20 (and index 77 in docket no. 10830-20) in docket nos. 20894-19, 17749-21, and 17771-21 as of December 27, 2022. It is further
ORDERED that the Motion for Protective Order filed December 27, 2022, is granted in part and denied in part as stated herein. It is further
ORDERED that Jeffrey and Lori Hoyal, petitioners in docket no. 6791-20, and Crater Lake Trust, petitioner in docket no. 10830-20, shall respond to Mr. Simpson's request for admissions by January 27, 2023.