- 8 -
it before calendar call, he did not raise it even at the call of
the calendar.
Mr. Tijerina met with respondent for the first time on
Monday, February 9, 1998. He had no substantiation for any
alleged business expenses. On the following Wednesday, however,
Mr. Tijerina claimed that petitioners provided him with some
documentation for purported expenses in connection with their
self-employment income.
This Court has an interest in promoting respect for the
judicial process and encouraging orderly disposition of cases.
The Court expects the litigants to respect the judicial process
through even-handed enforcement of its Rules, which are designed
to serve the just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of each
case. See Rule 1(b); see also sec. 7453. If a party is
permitted to disregard the procedures established by this Court,
unfairness to others and disruption of the Court’s processes
occur. Attorneys admitted to practice before our Court are
presumed to know our Rules of Practice and Procedure and must
comply with our orders in a timely manner. We shall not permit
petitioners to present evidence in support of the new issue
raised at trial.
Pursuant to the stipulation of facts, the attached exhibits,
and concessions of petitioners, we find that the $31,297 Ms.
Brumley received in 1994 was self-employment income subject to
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011