Robert A. McNeil vs Internal Revenue Service
Bigger text (+) | Smaller text (-)
IRS is defeated... againby Robert A. McNeilOrder to Show Cause "On the petition of the United States, under 26 U.S.C. §§7402(b) and 7604(a) for an order requiring the respondent, Robert A. McNeil, to show cause why the respondent should not be compelled to obey an [sic] Internal Revenue Service summonses served upon the respondent on July 25, 2007 and September 19, 2007." The Order required that I appear in person before Judge Hittner, at 9:00 a.m. on April 24, 2008. I arrived at the courthouse in Houston, Texas, around 8:30 a.m., in plenty of time for the hearing. I took a seat on one of the long, wooden benches in the hallway, just outside of Courtroom 8A, opened one of my 3-ring binders of Exhibits, and began doing some last-minute reading. To my left, on another bench, was Roger Caris, IRS Revenue Officer, sitting with a nicely dressed woman, who I guessed was an Attorney. My suspicions were made clear when the woman got up, walked over to me, and introduced herself as Kathryn Bellis, Special Assistant U.S. Attorney, [allegedly] representing the United States of America. She told me that she and Mr. Caris had been discussing the September 19, 2007, summons (for year 2002 information), agreed that I had complied with its requirements, and were going to dismiss the enforcement of that summons. I told her "thank you," and she walked away. I went back to reading my Exhibits, in preparation for defending myself against the remaining summons, dated, July 25, 2007 (for 2003, 2004, 2005, and 2006 information.) About ten minutes later, Ms. Bellis walked back to where I was sitting and told me that she had been talking to Mr. Caris about the remaining summons, and they agreed that I had complied with its requirements, as well, and were going to dismiss the enforcement of that summons too. With that said, she produced two copies of a freshly printed "MOTION TO DISMISS WITH PREJUDICE," which states the following: "TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF THE COURT: "With prejudice" is a legal term that means the United States of America cannot issue summonses for my records again for tax years 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, and 2006. I confess that I was a little confused about why the U.S. Attorney changed her mind and decided not to pursue enforcement action in federal court, because I never gave the Government one document required by the summonses. I can only assume that there was something in my 74-page response to the Petition that she did not want to argue in court. Whatever the case, Ms. Bellis signed and dated both copies of the Motion, handed me one copy, and said I could go. She said she was going to file the copy with the court and there would be no hearing. So, I packed up my briefcases and left with signed Motion in hand. The United States of America backed down in the face of a challenge. Sometimes the good guys DO win! Read the brief
Visit here for exhibits and more information |
here
Specialty Areas
All the powers in the universe seem to favor the person who has confidence. | ||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
