Opinion
3011-23
12-14-2023
ANTONINE POITEVIEN, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
ORDER
Cary Douglas Pugh Judge
By Notice date September 5, 2023, this case was set for trial at the Court's January 29, 2023, Miami, Florida trial session. Attached to the notice setting case for trial was the Court's Standing Pretrial Order, which states in part: "If a complete stipulation of facts is not ready for submission no later than 14 days before the first day of the trial session, or when otherwise ordered by the Court, and if the Court determines that this is due to lack of cooperation by either party, the Court may order sanctions against the uncooperative party." Further, Rule 91(f) of the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure states that if a "party has refused or failed to make such a stipulation of any matter within the terms of this Rule, the party proposing to stipulate may * * * file a motion with the Court for an order directing the delinquent party to show cause why the matters covered in the motion should not be deemed admitted for the purposes of the case".
On December 13, 2023, respondent filed a Motion For Order To Show Cause Why Proposed Facts And Evidence Should Not Be Accepted As Established, pursuant to Rule 91(f) of the Court's Rules of Practice and Procedure, for an order to show cause why facts and evidence set forth in respondent's proposed Stipulation of Facts should not be accepted as established for purposes of this case. Respondent attached to his motion as "Exhibit A" a copy of his proposed Stipulation of Facts as well as documents regarding the basis upon which the evidence contained in the proposed Stipulation of Facts rests. Upon due consideration, and pursuant to the provisions of Rule 91(f), Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure, it is hereby
ORDERED that respondent's above-referenced motion filed December 13, 2023, pursuant to Rule 91(f) of the Court's Rules of Practice and Procedure, is granted. It is further
ORDERED that petitioner shall, on or before January 16, 2024, file a response in compliance with the provisions of Rule 91(f)(2), with proof of service of a copy thereof on respondent's counsel, showing why the matters set forth in respondent's above-referenced motion should not be deemed admitted for purposes of the pending case. If no response is filed with the Court within the period specified above with respect to any matter or portion thereof, or if the response is evasive or not fairly directed to the proposed stipulation or portion thereof, such matter or portion thereof shall be deemed stipulated for purposes of the pending case, and an order entered accordingly, pursuant to Rule 91(f)(3).