Opinion
477-23S
07-21-2023
LAURISSA JEANNE SOLOMON, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
ORDER
Diana L. Leyden Special Trial Judge
On March 31, 2023, respondent filed a Motion for Leave to File Notice of Filing of Petition and Right to Intervene (motion). On that same date respondent lodged a Notice of Filing of Petition and Right to Intervene (notice) and before the Court ruled on the motion served the Notice of Filing of Petition and Right to Intervene on Russel Michael Long. Petitioner filed an Objection to respondent's motion on May 17, 2023. On June 23, 2023, this case was scheduled for a remote special hearing on respondent's motion, to take place on July 17, 2023. By Order served July 12, 2023, this case was assigned to the undersigned for disposition of respondent's motion.
On July 17, 2023, this case was called at the Court's remote special hearing. There was no appearance by or on behalf of petitioner. Respondent appeared and was heard.
In innocent spouse cases section 6015(e)(4) provides that the other spouse is entitled to notice of the proceeding and requires the Court to establish rules to ensure the other spouse is provided adequate notice and an opportunity to become a party to the proceeding. Pursuant to Rule 325(a) respondent must serve notice of the filing of the petition on the other spouse and notify that individual of their right to intervene in the proceeding. The rule further provides that respondent shall serve that notice on the other spouse and simultaneously file that notice with the Court no later than 60 days after the date of service of the petition.
In this case respondent filed his motion and lodged the notice with the Court approximately one week after that due date for filing such under Rule 325, explaining that, due to an inadvertent error, the notice was not served on petitioner's former spouse or filed with the Court within the time prescribed by Rule 325(a). Petitioner's objection appears to be based in part on an allegation that confronting her former spouse may cause trauma. The Court takes this opportunity to remind petitioner that she may file a motion to proceed remotely and if the trial is conducted remotely she would not need to be in the same physical space as her former spouse.
The Court's Rules generally provide the Court discretion to allow filing out of time, and given the circumstances in the present case, the Court will grant respondent's motion and file the lodged notice.
Upon due consideration and for cause, it is
ORDERED that respondent's Motion for Leave to File Notice of Filing of Petition and Right to Intervene, filed March 31, 2023, is granted, and the Clerk of the Court shall file respondent's Notice of Filing of Petition and Right to Intervene, lodged March 31, 2023, as of the date of this Order.