Opinion
6696-22
09-26-2024
JENNIFER E. ZEIGLER, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
ORDER
Ronald L. Buch Judge
This case was previously set for trial in Los Angeles, California. In a Joint Status Report filed June 24, 2024, the parties informed the Court that petitioner was in the process of submitting documents in an effort to resolve this case. The parties asked for additional time to file a status report or stipulated decision. The Court ordered that the parties file a status report by September 27, 2024 (a Friday).
What followed was a proverbial (and literal) he-said-she-said. According to petitioner's counsel, he reached out to Commissioner's counsel on Monday, September 23 by both telephone and email and informed Commissioner's counsel that an additional document production would be forthcoming this week (i.e., before a status report was due). On Tuesday, September 24, 2024, the Commissioner's counsel filed a Status Report informing the Court that, as of the date of the report, she had not received additional documents. The following day, petitioner's counsel filed a Status Report informing the Court of a series of circumstances that caused a delay in providing additional documents and informing the Court that petitioner "has made" a second document production.
The parties conflicting status reports also made conflicting requests of the Court. Petitioner's counsel requested that the Court order another status report in 90 days. Counsel for the Commissioner requested that the Court set the case on the next available trial session in Los Angeles, California. We will do neither. We will restore this case to the Court's general docket, which will cause the case to be scheduled for trial at the next newly created trial session for Los Angeles, which will occur no earlier than March 2025. By so doing, the Court will provide the parties with time to resolve this case by agreement while also putting the case on track for trial if they are unable to resolve it. Accordingly, it is
ORDERED that this case is restored to the general docket. Jurisdiction is no longer retained by the undersigned.