Opinion
18511-22S
09-06-2023
JULIAN RICHARD WELLINGTON, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
ORDER
Alina I. Marshall Judge
This case is currently calendared for further trial at the remote Special Trial Session of the Court scheduled to commence on September 7, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. (ET). On September 2, 2023, the Court filed petitioner's Motion for Continuance.
On February 16, 2023, the Court served its Order calendaring this case for trial on the June 5, 2023, Columbus, Ohio trial session. Counsel for respondent filed a Pretrial Memorandum on May 15, 2023 as directed by the Court's Standing Pretrial Order for Small Tax Cases. The Court scheduled a conference call with the parties on May 22, 2023, and subsequently rescheduled it twice at the request of petitioner. The Court held a conference call with the parties on May 30, 2023, to discuss the status of the case.
On June 1, 2023, petitioner e-mailed documents to the Court as well as respondent's counsel. The Court informed petitioner that documents sent via e-mail are not in the record, the Judge would not be able to review them, and he should file documents in paper via mail or electronically via the Court's case management system (DAWSON). On June 2, 2023, petitioner submitted a Pretrial Memorandum, inadvertently creating a new case within DAWSON; that document was ultimately filed by the Court in this docket on June 22, 2023.
This case was called from the calendar of the June 5, 2023, Columbus, Ohio, remote trial session. Petitioner appeared and orally moved the Court to continue this case. Counsel for respondent objected to the oral motion for continuance, however the Court granted petitioner's motion and set status reports to ensure that progress was being made on a stipulation of facts and preparing the case for trial. Subsequently the Court ordered status reports from the parties due on June 19, 2023 and July 7, 2023. Petitioner did not file a status report in response to either of the Court's orders, although the Court's records reflect that petitioner was granted eAccess on June 21, 2023. Because the parties were not making progress, the Court set this case for trial on August 30, 2023, by Order served July 11, 2023.
On August 18, 2023, the Court contacted the parties in this case and scheduled a conference call for August 25, 2023. Since August 25, 2023, petitioner has filed numerous documents with the Court but none of them address any issues arising from the notices of deficiency upon which this case is based.
On August 30, 2023, the Court held a partial trial in this case during which petitioner disconnected from the remote proceeding and did not log back into the proceeding. The Court took a recess and requested that chambers staff, the trial clerk, and respondent's counsel all reach out to petitioner. During the recess, petitioner sent an e-mail to the Court's Chambers Administrator stating "My signal dropped, tried to call back several times. Low signal strength, I will keep trying to call back". Also during the recess, chambers staff, the trial clerk, and respondent's counsel tried to reach petitioner. Petitioner did not respond to missed calls, voicemails, or emails during that time and did not appear when the case was recalled at 1:00 p.m. (ET). Petitioner did not respond to chambers staff or trial clerk communications, or otherwise reach out to the Court, on August 30, August 31, or September 1, 2023.
On September 1, 2023, the Court served an Order setting this case for further trial on September 7, 2023. Also, on September 1, 2023, as a courtesy, the Court called petitioner to inform him of the new trial date. On September 2, 2023, petitioner filed a Motion for Continuance and on September 3, 2023, petitioner filed a First Request for Admissions, advancing similar arguments that the Court cautioned him about in the Orders served September 1, 2023.
Despite numerous attempts to engage petitioner in preparing this case for trial, petitioner has declined to address or offer evidence regarding the determinations set forth in the notices of deficiency upon which this case is based. He has also refused to stipulate as required by Rule 91, Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure. On September 5, 2023, respondent filed a Notice of Objection to Petitioner's Motion for Continuance. Premises considered, it is
ORDERED that petitioner's Motion for Continuance, filed September 2, 2023, is denied.