- 15 -
Binder ever substituted in on this appeal [No. 01-
70155] as their attorney of record. * * *
On the same day, Izen filed a motion in the Adair appeal (docket
No. 01-70155) to transfer consideration of appellate attorney’s
fees to the Tax Court. See 9th Cir. R. 39-1.8. Jones made no
filing on behalf of any of the Jones petitioners under either
Ninth Circuit rule 39-1.6 or 39-1.8.
The Court of Appeals granted Izen’s motion to transfer under
Ninth Circuit rule 39-1.8 on May 8, 2003. On May 28, 2003, the
Court of Appeals remanded the Binder/Minns fee requests to the
Tax Court “for a determination of entitlement and, if warranted,
amount.”
On May 19, 2005, more than 2 years after the Court of
Appeals had granted his motion to transfer under Ninth Circuit
rule 39-1.8 in the Adair appeal, Izen filed in this Court, on
behalf of the Youngs, a motion for appellate attorney’s fees and
expenses under section 6673 (the Izen fee request). On July 15,
2005, Jones filed a similar motion in this Court on behalf of the
Jones petitioners (the Jones fee request).9
In a September 8, 2005 order pertaining to both the Izen fee
request and the Jones fee request, which we incorporate by
9 To update the story regarding Sticht’s appellate fees, see
Dixon v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2006-97 n.12., the Court has
been given to understand that Sticht and respondent are close to
completion of a comprehensive stipulation and submission
regarding the fee claims of participating nontest case
petitioners represented by Sticht.
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011