William C. Stearman III - Page 5

                                        - 5 -                                         
          petitioner to file his request for admissions.  Petitioner failed           
          to do so.                                                                   
               On November 23, 2004, the Court lodged, in both dockets, a             
          document entitled “Probable Cause Affidavit” with attached                  
          exhibits (PCA), which petitioner had submitted to the Court.  The           
          PCA alleged various criminal acts taken by the Court, objected to           
          the Tax Court Rules, requested “production” of a Tax Court Judge,           
          and contained “interrogatories” directed to a Tax Court Judge.              
               On November 24, 2004, petitioner filed status reports in               
          both dockets.  The status reports contain disrespectful and                 
          vulgar statements directed to the Court, and we shall not repeat            
          them herein.  That same day, in docket No. 20928-03, petitioner             
          filed a response to respondent’s motion to dismiss for failure to           
          state a claim upon which relief could be granted and to impose a            
          penalty under section 6673(a).4                                             
               Several of the documents filed or lodged with the Court by             
          petitioner contain the heading:  “UNITED STATES TAX COURT (a                
          federal corporation, committing criminal acts under disguise of             
          providing professionally incompetent arbitration services, while            
          doing business in ‘this state’ via a tax exemption certificate.”            
               Petitioner has advanced shopworn arguments characteristic of           
          tax-protester rhetoric that has been universally rejected by this           


               4  We note that on the response petitioner also listed                 
          docket No. 15561-04.  For filing purposes, this docket number was           
          crossed out.                                                                




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011