Monday, November 30, 2015

Leonard Cohen's Embarrassing, Misogynistic & Lame All Purpose Defense - The Other Party Is Disgruntled Or A "Scorned" Woman


From: Kelley Lynch <kelley.lynch.2010@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 8:03 AM
Subject: Fwd: Kelley Lynch emails dated November 29, 2015
To: Paulmikell.A.Fabian@irscounsel.treas.gov, "*IRS.Commisioner" <*IRS.Commisioner@irs.gov>, Washington Field <washington.field@ic.fbi.gov>, ASKDOJ <ASKDOJ@usdoj.gov>, "Division, Criminal" <Criminal.Division@usdoj.gov>, "Doug.Davis" <Doug.Davis@ftb.ca.gov>, Dennis <Dennis@riordan-horgan.com>, MollyHale <MollyHale@ucia.gov>, nsapao <nsapao@nsa.gov>, fsb <fsb@fsb.ru>, rbyucaipa <rbyucaipa@yahoo.com>, khuvane <khuvane@caa.com>, blourd <blourd@caa.com>, Robert MacMillan <robert.macmillan@gmail.com>, a <anderson.cooper@cnn.com>, wennermedia <wennermedia@gmail.com>, Mike Feuer <mike.feuer@lacity.org>, "glenn.greenwald" <glenn.greenwald@firstlook.org>, Harriet Ryan <harriet.ryan@latimes.com>, "hailey.branson" <hailey.branson@latimes.com>, Stan Garnett <stan.garnett@gmail.com>, "mayor.garcetti" <mayor.garcetti@lacity.org>, Opla-pd-los-occ <OPLA-PD-LOS-OCC@ice.dhs.gov>, "Kelly.Sopko" <Kelly.Sopko@tigta.treas.gov>, Whistleblower <whistleblower@judiciary-rep.senate.gov>, Attacheottawa <AttacheOttawa@ci.irs.gov>, tips@radaronline.com


Good Morning Mr. Fabian,

I see the Criminal Stalker has already submitted his legal opinion to IRS Chief Trial Counsel's Office.

I personally do not believe that anyone can waltz into court and allege "fraud" or "perjury" unless those elements exist.  Leonard Cohen and his representatives have lied extensively in every court case that involves me.  Hazel Atlas has not been suspended by Rule 60(b) but I do understand why most people view most lawyers as absolute whores.  Actually, Tax Court does have equitable powers.  Please see Innocence Spouse cases as an example.

I have nothing further to say publicly about the issues I have presented to Tax Court.  My Petition and Objection were filed.  

Leonard Cohen and his legal representatives seem to feel that arguing that someone (or everyone Cohen has it out for) are disgruntled or ex-lovers will do the trick.  Was I disgruntled when Cohen, holding a green card, funneled income into off-shore accounts?  Was I disgruntled when Cohen held numerous social security numbers?  Was I disgruntled when Cohen failed to report the TH sale; extinguished my promissory note; and extinguished the annuity obligation itself?  Was I disgruntled when Cohen borrowed (embezzled actually) approximately $6.7 million in corporate assets and failed to repay them with interest?  Was I disgruntled when Cohen, who seems to believe he should benefit from his wrongdoing, obtained fraudulent tax refunds based on a fabricated narrative and lies?  No.  That has nothing to do with me.  It has to do with Leonard Cohen's greed, sense of entitlement; habitual patterns; and disdain for paying taxes.  The man cannot even live in Canada, due to tax and residence issues, although he is their National Treasure.

In any event, the Proxy Operative continues to interfere with a federal tax controversy and belongs in prison.  I think the Criminal Stalker did indeed argue that the entire system of capitalism would collapse if Cohen were held accountable for his action.  Failing to hold anyone accountable, due to rock solid notions about finality, have provided people in this unstable world with a license to engage in criminal conduct.  A judge's desire to clear his or her docket is not a good enough reason to deprive anyone of their constitutional rights.  They don't mind wasting taxpayer dollars arguing against finality so it's not final in any event.  It's preposterous.  

I'll wait to see what Tax Court has to say; will submit my Declaration re. the tampering with the evidence blog; and will appeal if necessary.


Kelley



---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Stephen R. Gianelli <stephengianelli@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 2:46 AM
Subject: Kelley Lynch emails dated November 29, 2015
To: kelley.lynch.2013@gmail.com
Cc: Paulmikell.A.Fabian@irscounsel.treas.gov

Ms. Lynch,

The 71-year old Supreme Court case you are fond of citing for the proposition that you can waltz into any court you please, allege “fraud” or “perjury,” and ask to set aside judgments entered more than a decade before in litigation that was long ago final – Hazel-Atlas Glass Company v. Hartford-Empire Co., 322 U.S. 238 (1944) has been superseded and limited by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

FRCP, rule 60 (b), says in pertinent part:

“Grounds for Relief from a Final Judgment, Order, or Proceeding. On motion and just terms, the court may relieve a party or its legal representative from a final judgment, order, or proceeding for the following reasons: (par.) (3) fraud (whether previously called intrinsic or extrinsic), misrepresentation, or misconduct by an opposing party”.

Subdivision (c) adds more critical language:

“Timing and Effect of the Motion. (par.) (1) Timing. A motion under Rule 60(b) must be made within a reasonable timeand for reasons (1), (2), and (3) no more than a year after the entry of the judgment or order or the date of the proceeding.”

There are three takeaways here - all three of them fatal to what you are trying to do.

First, since you are not a “party”  to Leonard Cohen’s stipulated tax court decision that you seek to set aside, you do not qualify for relief.

Second, because Leonard Cohen was not your “opposing party” in that matter, you do not qualify for relief from the alleged fraud.

Third, because 13-years has passed since the stipulated tax court decision was entered on April 1, 2003 in Docket No.007024-02, your request is neither reasonably timed, nor was it made within the 1-year outside time limit to ask a federal court to set aside a prior judgment or other order based on “fraud (whether previously called intrinsic or extrinsic)”.

As I have already noted, the tax court does not have general equitable power to act. Its jurisdiction can only come from Title 26 – which requires that a tax court petition be proceeded by a notice of determination mailed to the petitioner (that would be you) prior to the petition being filed.

You have conceded that no such notice of determination was ever mailed to you.

Therefore, the tax court has no choice but to dismiss your pending petition for lack of jurisdiction.

It is really quite simple.

As for the common sense aspect of it, I agree the sky would not fall if Kelley Lynch was allowed to do what she wants in this once case, just this once. But the rules apply to every petitioner or plaintiff in every case. And if the legal system operated without the kind of underlying finality underpinning FRCP, rule 60 (b), and disgruntled former employees were allowed to come into tax court or other fora 13-years after a judgment was entered in a case they were not even a party to and attack the judgment based on alleged “fraud” or “perjury” there would be chaos.   

Stephen Gianelli
Crete, Greece

From: Kelley Lynch <kelley.lynch.2010@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, Nov 29, 2015 at 4:44 PM
Subject: Re: Fw: RE: Genesis of a Tax Court dispute
To: "*IRS.Commisioner" <*IRS.Commisioner@irs.gov>, Washington Field <washington.field@ic.fbi.gov>, ASKDOJ <ASKDOJ@usdoj.gov>, "Division, Criminal" <Criminal.Division@usdoj.gov>, "Doug.Davis" <Doug.Davis@ftb.ca.gov>, Dennis <Dennis@riordan-horgan.com>, MollyHale <MollyHale@ucia.gov>, nsapao <nsapao@nsa.gov>, fsb <fsb@fsb.ru>, rbyucaipa <rbyucaipa@yahoo.com>, khuvane <khuvane@caa.com>, blourd <blourd@caa.com>, Robert MacMillan <robert.macmillan@gmail.com>, a <anderson.cooper@cnn.com>, wennermedia <wennermedia@gmail.com>, Mick Brown <mick.brown@telegraph.co.uk>, "glenn.greenwald" <glenn.greenwald@firstlook.org>, Harriet Ryan <harriet.ryan@latimes.com>, "hailey.branson" <hailey.branson@latimes.com>, Stan Garnett <stan.garnett@gmail.com>, Mike Feuer <mike.feuer@lacity.org>, "mayor.garcetti" <mayor.garcetti@lacity.org>, Opla-pd-los-occ <OPLA-PD-LOS-OCC@ice.dhs.gov>, "Kelly.Sopko" <Kelly.Sopko@tigta.treas.gov>, Whistleblower <whistleblower@judiciary-rep.senate.gov>, Attacheottawa <AttacheOttawa@ci.irs.gov>, tips@radaronline.comPaulmikell.A.Fabian@irscounsel.treas.gov

Hello IRS,

I tend to doubt our system of capitalism would fail miserably if Leonard Cohen were held accountable for his actions.  I also tend to doubt that any U.S. citizen would agree with that assessment.  Gianelli is utterly and absolutely obsessed.  Actually, the matter before Tax Court relates to fraud upon the court and Cohen's fraud and deception with respect to Traditional Holdings, LLC and Blue Mist Touring Company, Inc.  Hazel-Atlas addressed a judgment that was 10 years old and obtained via fraud upon the court.  Why does the Criminal Stalker think Alan Hootnick is interested in any of this.  Gianelli is evidently behind the scenes slandering me extensively.  This is a 24/7 job for this criminal.  I'm not contesting the affairs of another taxpayer.  I'm contesting his fraudulent tax refunds (based on lies about me), use of a fabricated and fraudulent narrative to defend Leonard Cohen against allegations that he committed criminal tax fraud (based on lies about me), and Cohen's theft form BMT and TH.  I think I've been quite clear about that fact.  I think it's quite clear that Gianelli has read my Tax Court Petition.  The man is a pathetic and chronic liar.  I'm surprised LA Confidential hasn't offered him a job - or have they?  He did work with the City Attorney to have me falsely arrested and may have found a sympathetic ear with Spector prosecutor Alan Jackson about me.  He is also most definitely an unofficial member of Leonard Cohen's legal team for lack of a better phrase.  

Kelley

From: Kelley Lynch <kelley.lynch.2013@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, Nov 29, 2015 at 1:32 PM
Subject: Fwd: Kelley Lynch's email dated Sun, Nov 29, 2015 at 11:36 AM
To: Fabian Paulmikell A <Paulmikell.A.Fabian@irscounsel.treas.gov>, "*irs. commissioner" <*IRS.Commissioner@irs.gov>, Washington Field <washington.field@ic.fbi.gov>, ASKDOJ <ASKDOJ@usdoj.gov>, ": Division, Criminal" <Criminal.Division@usdoj.gov>, "Doug.Davis" <Doug.Davis@ftb.ca.gov>, Dennis <Dennis@riordan-horgan.com>, MollyHale <MollyHale@ucia.gov>, nsapao <nsapao@nsa.gov>, fsb <fsb@fsb.ru>, rbyucaipa <rbyucaipa@yahoo.com>, khuvane <khuvane@caa.com>, blourd <blourd@caa.com>, Robert MacMillan <robert.macmillan@gmail.com>, a <anderson.cooper@cnn.com>, wennermedia <wennermedia@gmail.com>, Mick Brown <mick.brown@telegraph.co.uk>, "glenn.greenwald" <glenn.greenwald@firstlook.org>, Harriet Ryan <harriet.ryan@latimes.com>, "hailey.branson" <hailey.branson@latimes.com>, Stan Garnett <stan.garnett@gmail.com>, mike.feuer@lacity.org, "mayor.garcetti" <mayor.garcetti@lacity.org>, Opla-pd-los-occ <OPLA-PD-LOS-OCC@ice.dhs.gov>, "Kelly.Sopko" <Kelly.Sopko@tigta.treas.gov>, Whistleblower <whistleblower@judiciary-rep.senate.gov>, Attacheottawa <AttacheOttawa@ci.irs.gov>, tips@radaronline.com

Hello Mr. Fabian,

The Criminal Stalker is certainly intent on interfering with this Tax Court matter.  I would like to remind you that he does not represent me; I do not know who this criminal is; and I have not provided Internal Revenue Service with a Power of Attorney to speak to this individual about private tax matters involving me.  Leonard Cohen is not a party to this matter and therefore Gianelli's ongoing communications with IRS Chief Trial Counsel's Office, arguing Cohen's legal positions, are beyond outrageous.

I personally believe Stephen Gianelli does indeed represent Leonard Cohen.  As this man is a chronic liar nothing he says should be taken as anything even remotely resembling the truth.  Since approximately May 2009, Stephen Gianelli has communicated with Kory & Rice, Cohen's general counsel, personal and business managers.  These individuals have relentlessly lied about me and engaged in egregious misconduct with respect to me.  That would include, but is not limited to, perjured testimony and the transmittal of fraudulent accusations and documents to Internal Revenue Service.  Gianelli clearly read my Tax Court Petition and has repeatedly commented on the content of that Petition.  I have submitted his emails to you with respect to that issue.

I also personally believe that Stephen Gianelli did tamper with and altered the content of my Tax Petition Word Press blog.  I have explained my reasons for this belief in the draft declaration I submitted to you.  That declaration will now be submitted to Tax Court with a request that the Court refer the matter to federal law enforcement for an investigation.  Gianelli is the individual attempting to insert himself into this matter.  I have no idea who this man but understand that he functions as an agent provocateur and infiltrator who has relentlessly targeted me, my sons, family members, friends, and witnesses.  I have relentlessly advised this criminal to cease and desist.

I am aware that Tax Court is an Article I court with specific jurisdiction.  Tax Court clearly has jurisdiction to address any decisions based on fraud upon the court.  I haven't submitted a motion arguing the fraud upon the court or any other issue for that matter.  I provided Tax Court with specific facts, and evidence, and asked for leave to file the motion.  I think I've made the issues quite clear.  That would include, but is not limited to, the fact that Leonard Cohen stole the $1 million from Traditional Holdings, LLC and/or Blue Mist Touring Company, Inc. and the $1 million in no way represented a "loan" from either entity to Leonard Cohen.  He merely has an inconceivable sense of entitlement and views himself as the alter ego of numerous corporate entities and the assets themselves as his personal piggy bank.

I tend to doubt the entire financial system would collapse if someone were actually held accountable for their conduct and believe most taxpayers in this country would overwhelmingly agree.

Stephen Gianelli has no legal right to criminally harass or stalk me over my public opinions posted on my riverdeepbook.blogspot.com blog.  I can assure you that these matters are not "self-manufactured" dramas and that would include the steps on the TH tax returns and other issues related to what definitely appears to be civil and criminal tax fraud on the part of Leonard Cohen.  I will let you personally speak for yourself as I have no intention of following the orders of a common criminal.  I can assure you that these issues are not merely my personal grievances.

I would like to note that Stephen Gianelli views himself as absolutely immune with respect to his own actions.  That may be due to the fact that he appears to have been in bed with both the City Attorney and District Attorney of Los Angeles.  He is also obsessed with Phil Spector's case and Investigator Frayeh immediately concluded that this criminal may have found a sympathetic ear with Spector prosecutor Alan Jackson about me.  See my Show Trial for further details.  Let me end by quoting my public defender with respect to that trial:  the City Attorney is attempting to sabotage IRS; they want to discredit you; and the District Attorney does not want the Spector verdict overturned.  My appellate attorney, who was harassed by Gianelli for over a year, wrote that my trial was a tax fraud case related to Leonard Cohen that demands an IRS investigation.  I personally do not believe this individual, who seems more like an escapee from a criminal mental asylum than a "lawyer," will ever change those facts through his lies, slander, and ongoing criminal conduct.  As I have continuously stated to IRS, FBI, and DOJ:  Stephen Gianelli belongs in prison with many others.


Kelley



Sunday, November 29, 2015

The Notion That Capitalism Itself Would Fail Were Leonard Cohen Held Accountable For His Actions Is Laughable, Absurd, & Obscene

From: Kelley Lynch <kelley.lynch.2010@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, Nov 29, 2015 at 4:44 PM
Subject: Re: Fw: RE: Genesis of a Tax Court dispute
To: "*IRS.Commisioner" <*IRS.Commisioner@irs.gov>, Washington Field <washington.field@ic.fbi.gov>, ASKDOJ <ASKDOJ@usdoj.gov>, "Division, Criminal" <Criminal.Division@usdoj.gov>, "Doug.Davis" <Doug.Davis@ftb.ca.gov>, Dennis <Dennis@riordan-horgan.com>, MollyHale <MollyHale@ucia.gov>, nsapao <nsapao@nsa.gov>, fsb <fsb@fsb.ru>, rbyucaipa <rbyucaipa@yahoo.com>, khuvane <khuvane@caa.com>, blourd <blourd@caa.com>, Robert MacMillan <robert.macmillan@gmail.com>, a <anderson.cooper@cnn.com>, wennermedia <wennermedia@gmail.com>, Mick Brown <mick.brown@telegraph.co.uk>, "glenn.greenwald" <glenn.greenwald@firstlook.org>, Harriet Ryan <harriet.ryan@latimes.com>, "hailey.branson" <hailey.branson@latimes.com>, Stan Garnett <stan.garnett@gmail.com>, Mike Feuer <mike.feuer@lacity.org>, "mayor.garcetti" <mayor.garcetti@lacity.org>, Opla-pd-los-occ <OPLA-PD-LOS-OCC@ice.dhs.gov>, "Kelly.Sopko" <Kelly.Sopko@tigta.treas.gov>, Whistleblower <whistleblower@judiciary-rep.senate.gov>, Attacheottawa <AttacheOttawa@ci.irs.gov>, tips@radaronline.com, Paulmikell.A.Fabian@irscounsel.treas.gov


Hello IRS,

I tend to doubt our system of capitalism would fail miserably if Leonard Cohen were held accountable for his actions.  I also tend to doubt that any U.S. citizen would agree with that assessment.  Gianelli is utterly and absolutely obsessed.  Actually, the matter before Tax Court relates to fraud upon the court and Cohen's fraud and deception with respect to Traditional Holdings, LLC and Blue Mist Touring Company, Inc.  Hazel-Atlas addressed a judgment that was 10 years old and obtained via fraud upon the court.  Why does the Criminal Stalker think Alan Hootnick is interested in any of this.  Gianelli is evidently behind the scenes slandering me extensively.  This is a 24/7 job for this criminal.  I'm not contesting the affairs of another taxpayer.  I'm contesting his fraudulent tax refunds (based on lies about me), use of a fabricated and fraudulent narrative to defend Leonard Cohen against allegations that he committed criminal tax fraud (based on lies about me), and Cohen's theft form BMT and TH.  I think I've been quite clear about that fact.  I think it's quite clear that Gianelli has read my Tax Court Petition.  The man is a pathetic and chronic liar.  I'm surprised LA Confidential hasn't offered him a job - or have they?  He did work with the City Attorney to have me falsely arrested and may have found a sympathetic ear with Spector prosecutor Alan Jackson about me.  He is also most definitely an unofficial member of Leonard Cohen's legal team for lack of a better phrase.  

Kelley


Inline image 1

On Sun, Nov 29, 2015 at 4:34 PM, Kelley Lynch <kelley.lynch.2010@gmail.com> wrote:

Alan Hootnick,

I have no idea why my Criminal Stalker sent this email to you or why it was forwarded to me.  If you are interested in this situation, please refer to my riverdeepbook.blogspot.com.  I have carefully documented the conduct of Gianelli who I view as a potential escapee from a criminal mental asylum and professional criminal.  

It does appear as though Gianelli has concerns about security issues and possibly believes you are attempting to "mind control" him.  I wouldn't worry to much as he seems like a brainless ambulance chaser in bed with Spector's prosecutors and Leonard Cohen.

For the record, there is fraud and perjury involved with ever Cohen related matter that relates to me.  For Leonard Cohen, this is merely another opportunity to flaunt yet another fabricated and self-serving narrative.  As you might imagine, Phil Spector could not stand this man and thought he was a talentless porn artist with biblical references.  


Kelley Lynch


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: alan hootnick <ahootnick@yahoo.com>
Date: Sun, Nov 29, 2015 at 12:55 PM
Subject: Fw: RE: Genesis of a Tax Court dispute
To: Kelley Lynch <kelley.lynch.2010@gmail.com>


--- On Sun, 11/29/15, alan hootnick <ahootnick@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> --------------------------------------------
> On Sun, 11/29/15, Stephen R. Gianelli <stephengianelli@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>  Subject: RE: Genesis of a Tax Court dispute
>  To: "'alan hootnick'" <ahootnick@yahoo.com>
>  Date: Sunday, November 29, 2015, 3:10 PM
>

 She feels very entitled. If it
>  benefits her, it must be right. She really does not want
> to
>  consider an opposite point of view other than what she
>  wants. If a court rules against her (which is every time
> she
>  gets involved in a legal proceeding – because her view
> of
>  “reality” is so self-serving and unreasonable) there
> was
>  "perjury" or "fraud" of the judge
>  was" corrupt".   And, win lose or draw if she feels
>  she is making Leonard Cohen's life miserable, it was
>  worth it.  The larger picture, to me, is how
>  silly it is for even a layperson to think that you can ask
>  any court - the tax court, the LA court, any court - to go
>  unwind a legal judgement or decision or settlement that
> you
>  did not participate it that occurred a decade or more ago.
>  If she can attack Leonard Cohen's stipulated tax court
>  decision reached 2003 in a case Cohen filed in tax court
> in
>  2001 concerning tax matters relating to 1999 - then there
>  would be no finality or certainty in the world. Any pissed
>  off employee, former spouse or former neighbor or cocktail
>  waitress you slighted could cause the IRS to set aside
> other
>  business and reopen another citizens tax matter from 15
>  years ago. Or a plaintiff who wins title to real estate
> and
>  builds a 600 room hotel on the property would have to
> worry
>  about someone coming out of the woodwork 10 years later
>  claiming title because "they weren’t served".
>    That is why the underlying policy
>  of the law favors FINALITY over the justice of a give case
>  at a certain point. Consequently, defendants have 6-months
>  in most cases to file a motion to set aside a default
>  judgment in most cases and an outside time limit of
> 2-years
>  in an additional, more narrow set of cases, but in all
> cases
>  must file the motion as soon as they discover (or should
>  have discovered with reasonable diligence) the grounds to
>  file the motion - whichever is sooner.   That is why
> we don't allow one
>  tax payer to contest the tax affairs of another and why
>  there are statutes of limitation for civil
>  claims.  CERTAINTY. Capitalism cannot work
>  without it. Banks could not loan money and investors could
>  not assess financial risk and title companies could not
>  insure transactions.  You can usually predict legal
>  outcomes by understanding a few basic underlying
> principles.
>  But not if you don’t want to understand.  BTW, how come
> your emails are
>  formatted in text instead of HTML? Is it
>  security?
>  


> 11/29/15, Stephen
>  R. Gianelli <stephengianelli@gmail.com>
>  wrote:   Subject: Genesis of a Tax
>  Court dispute To:
>  ahootnick@yahoo.com
> Date: Sunday, November
>  29, 2015, 4:11 AM
>   Genesis of a Tax Court disputeMany
>  Tax Court cases
>  involve disputes over Federal income tax and  penalties,
>  often after an examination by the Internal  Revenue
> Service
>  of a taxpayer's return. After issuance of a series of
>  preliminary written notices and a lack of agreement
>  between  the taxpayer and the IRS, the IRS formally
>  "determines" the amount of the
>  "deficiency" and issues a formal notice called a
>  "statutory notice of deficiency," or "ninety
>  day  letter" In this context, the term
>  "deficiency" is a legal term of art, and is not
>  necessarily equal to the amount of unpaid tax (although
> it
>  usually is). The deficiency is generally the excess of
> the
>  amount the IRS contends is the correct tax over the
> amount
>  the taxpayer showed on the return—in both  cases,
> without
>  regard to how much has actually been  paid. Upon issuance
>  of the statutory  notice of deficiency (after IRS
>  determination of the  tax amount, but before the formal
> IRS
>  assessment of the  tax), the taxpayer  generally has 90
>  days to file a Tax Court petition for
>  "redetermination of the deficiency". If no
>  petition is timely filed, the IRS may then statutorily
>  "assess" the tax. To "assess" the tax
>  in  this sense means to administratively and formally
>  record the  tax on the books of the United States
>  Department of the  Treasury. This formal statutory
>  assessment is a critical  act, as the statutory tax lien
>  that later arises is  effective retroactively to the date
>  of the assessment, and  encumbers all property and rights
>  to property of the  taxpayer.   

Kelley Lynch's Email to Alan Hootnick Re. Her Criminal Stalker & Psychopath, Stephen Gianelli

From: Kelley Lynch <kelley.lynch.2010@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, Nov 29, 2015 at 4:34 PM
Subject: Fwd: Fw: RE: Genesis of a Tax Court dispute
To: alan hootnick <ahootnick@yahoo.com>, "*IRS.Commisioner" <*IRS.Commisioner@irs.gov>, Washington Field <washington.field@ic.fbi.gov>, ASKDOJ <ASKDOJ@usdoj.gov>, "Division, Criminal" <Criminal.Division@usdoj.gov>, "Doug.Davis" <Doug.Davis@ftb.ca.gov>, Dennis <Dennis@riordan-horgan.com>, MollyHale <MollyHale@ucia.gov>, nsapao <nsapao@nsa.gov>, fsb <fsb@fsb.ru>, rbyucaipa <rbyucaipa@yahoo.com>, khuvane <khuvane@caa.com>, blourd <blourd@caa.com>, Robert MacMillan <robert.macmillan@gmail.com>, a <anderson.cooper@cnn.com>, wennermedia <wennermedia@gmail.com>, Mick Brown <mick.brown@telegraph.co.uk>, "glenn.greenwald" <glenn.greenwald@firstlook.org>, Harriet Ryan <harriet.ryan@latimes.com>, "hailey.branson" <hailey.branson@latimes.com>, Stan Garnett <stan.garnett@gmail.com>, Mike Feuer <mike.feuer@lacity.org>, "mayor.garcetti" <mayor.garcetti@lacity.org>, Opla-pd-los-occ <OPLA-PD-LOS-OCC@ice.dhs.gov>, "Kelly.Sopko" <Kelly.Sopko@tigta.treas.gov>, Whistleblower <whistleblower@judiciary-rep.senate.gov>, Attacheottawa <AttacheOttawa@ci.irs.gov>, tips@radaronline.com, Paulmikell.A.Fabian@irscounsel.treas.gov


Alan Hootnick,

I have no idea why my Criminal Stalker sent this email to you or why it was forwarded to me.  If you are interested in this situation, please refer to my riverdeepbook.blogspot.com.  I have carefully documented the conduct of Gianelli who I view as a potential escapee from a criminal mental asylum and professional criminal.  

It does appear as though Gianelli has concerns about security issues and possibly believes you are attempting to "mind control" him.  I wouldn't worry too much as he seems like a brainless ambulance chaser in bed with Spector's prosecutors and Leonard Cohen.

For the record, there is fraud and perjury involved with every Cohen related matter that relates to me.  For Leonard Cohen, this is merely another opportunity to flaunt yet another fabricated and self-serving narrative.  As you might imagine, Phil Spector could not stand this man and thought he was a talentless porn artist with biblical references.  


Kelley Lynch


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: alan hootnick <ahootnick@yahoo.com>
Date: Sun, Nov 29, 2015 at 12:55 PM
Subject: Fw: RE: Genesis of a Tax Court dispute
To: Kelley Lynch <kelley.lynch.2010@gmail.com>


--- On Sun, 11/29/15, alan hootnick <ahootnick@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> --------------------------------------------
> On Sun, 11/29/15, Stephen R. Gianelli <stephengianelli@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>  Subject: RE: Genesis of a Tax Court dispute
>  To: "'alan hootnick'" <ahootnick@yahoo.com>
>  Date: Sunday, November 29, 2015, 3:10 PM
>

 She feels very entitled. If it
>  benefits her, it must be right. She really does not want
> to
>  consider an opposite point of view other than what she
>  wants. If a court rules against her (which is every time
> she
>  gets involved in a legal proceeding – because her view
> of
>  “reality” is so self-serving and unreasonable) there
> was
>  "perjury" or "fraud" of the judge
>  was" corrupt".   And, win lose or draw if she feels
>  she is making Leonard Cohen's life miserable, it was
>  worth it.  The larger picture, to me, is how
>  silly it is for even a layperson to think that you can ask
>  any court - the tax court, the LA court, any court - to go
>  unwind a legal judgement or decision or settlement that
> you
>  did not participate it that occurred a decade or more ago.
>  If she can attack Leonard Cohen's stipulated tax court
>  decision reached 2003 in a case Cohen filed in tax court
> in
>  2001 concerning tax matters relating to 1999 - then there
>  would be no finality or certainty in the world. Any pissed
>  off employee, former spouse or former neighbor or cocktail
>  waitress you slighted could cause the IRS to set aside
> other
>  business and reopen another citizens tax matter from 15
>  years ago. Or a plaintiff who wins title to real estate
> and
>  builds a 600 room hotel on the property would have to
> worry
>  about someone coming out of the woodwork 10 years later
>  claiming title because "they weren’t served".
>    That is why the underlying policy
>  of the law favors FINALITY over the justice of a give case
>  at a certain point. Consequently, defendants have 6-months
>  in most cases to file a motion to set aside a default
>  judgment in most cases and an outside time limit of
> 2-years
>  in an additional, more narrow set of cases, but in all
> cases
>  must file the motion as soon as they discover (or should
>  have discovered with reasonable diligence) the grounds to
>  file the motion - whichever is sooner.   That is why
> we don't allow one
>  tax payer to contest the tax affairs of another and why
>  there are statutes of limitation for civil
>  claims.  CERTAINTY. Capitalism cannot work
>  without it. Banks could not loan money and investors could
>  not assess financial risk and title companies could not
>  insure transactions.  You can usually predict legal
>  outcomes by understanding a few basic underlying
> principles.
>  But not if you don’t want to understand.  BTW, how come
> your emails are
>  formatted in text instead of HTML? Is it
>  security?
>  


> 11/29/15, Stephen
>  R. Gianelli <stephengianelli@gmail.com>
>  wrote:   Subject: Genesis of a Tax
>  Court dispute To:
>  ahootnick@yahoo.com
> Date: Sunday, November
>  29, 2015, 4:11 AM
>   Genesis of a Tax Court disputeMany
>  Tax Court cases
>  involve disputes over Federal income tax and  penalties,
>  often after an examination by the Internal  Revenue
> Service
>  of a taxpayer's return. After issuance of a series of
>  preliminary written notices and a lack of agreement
>  between  the taxpayer and the IRS, the IRS formally
>  "determines" the amount of the
>  "deficiency" and issues a formal notice called a
>  "statutory notice of deficiency," or "ninety
>  day  letter" In this context, the term
>  "deficiency" is a legal term of art, and is not
>  necessarily equal to the amount of unpaid tax (although
> it
>  usually is). The deficiency is generally the excess of
> the
>  amount the IRS contends is the correct tax over the
> amount
>  the taxpayer showed on the return—in both  cases,
> without
>  regard to how much has actually been  paid. Upon issuance
>  of the statutory  notice of deficiency (after IRS
>  determination of the  tax amount, but before the formal
> IRS
>  assessment of the  tax), the taxpayer  generally has 90
>  days to file a Tax Court petition for
>  "redetermination of the deficiency". If no
>  petition is timely filed, the IRS may then statutorily
>  "assess" the tax. To "assess" the tax
>  in  this sense means to administratively and formally
>  record the  tax on the books of the United States
>  Department of the  Treasury. This formal statutory
>  assessment is a critical  act, as the statutory tax lien
>  that later arises is  effective retroactively to the date
>  of the assessment, and  encumbers all property and rights
>  to property of the  taxpayer.   

Kelley Lynch's Email to IRS Chief Trial Counsel's Office In Response to the Criminal Stalker's Ongoing Attempts to Interfere With A Tax Court Matter & Federal Tax Controversy

From: Kelley Lynch <kelley.lynch.2013@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, Nov 29, 2015 at 1:32 PM
Subject: Fwd: Kelley Lynch's email dated Sun, Nov 29, 2015 at 11:36 AM
To: Fabian Paulmikell A <Paulmikell.A.Fabian@irscounsel.treas.gov>, "*irs. commissioner" <*IRS.Commissioner@irs.gov>, Washington Field <washington.field@ic.fbi.gov>, ASKDOJ <ASKDOJ@usdoj.gov>, ": Division, Criminal" <Criminal.Division@usdoj.gov>, "Doug.Davis" <Doug.Davis@ftb.ca.gov>, Dennis <Dennis@riordan-horgan.com>, MollyHale <MollyHale@ucia.gov>, nsapao <nsapao@nsa.gov>, fsb <fsb@fsb.ru>, rbyucaipa <rbyucaipa@yahoo.com>, khuvane <khuvane@caa.com>, blourd <blourd@caa.com>, Robert MacMillan <robert.macmillan@gmail.com>, a <anderson.cooper@cnn.com>, wennermedia <wennermedia@gmail.com>, Mick Brown <mick.brown@telegraph.co.uk>, "glenn.greenwald" <glenn.greenwald@firstlook.org>, Harriet Ryan <harriet.ryan@latimes.com>, "hailey.branson" <hailey.branson@latimes.com>, Stan Garnett <stan.garnett@gmail.com>, mike.feuer@lacity.org, "mayor.garcetti" <mayor.garcetti@lacity.org>, Opla-pd-los-occ <OPLA-PD-LOS-OCC@ice.dhs.gov>, "Kelly.Sopko" <Kelly.Sopko@tigta.treas.gov>, Whistleblower <whistleblower@judiciary-rep.senate.gov>, Attacheottawa <AttacheOttawa@ci.irs.gov>, tips@radaronline.com


Hello Mr. Fabian,

The Criminal Stalker is certainly intent on interfering with this Tax Court matter.  I would like to remind you that he does not represent me; I do not know who this criminal is; and I have not provided Internal Revenue Service with a Power of Attorney to speak to this individual about private tax matters involving me.  Leonard Cohen is not a party to this matter and therefore Gianelli's ongoing communications with IRS Chief Trial Counsel's Office, arguing Cohen's legal positions, are beyond outrageous.

I personally believe Stephen Gianelli does indeed represent Leonard Cohen.  As this man is a chronic liar nothing he says should be taken as anything even remotely resembling the truth.  Since approximately May 2009, Stephen Gianelli has communicated with Kory & Rice, Cohen's general counsel, personal and business managers.  These individuals have relentlessly lied about me and engaged in egregious misconduct with respect to me.  That would include, but is not limited to, perjured testimony and the transmittal of fraudulent accusations and documents to Internal Revenue Service.  Gianelli clearly read my Tax Court Petition and has repeatedly commented on the content of that Petition.  I have submitted his emails to you with respect to that issue.

I also personally believe that Stephen Gianelli did tamper with and altered the content of my Tax Petition Word Press blog.  I have explained my reasons for this belief in the draft declaration I submitted to you.  That declaration will now be submitted to Tax Court with a request that the Court refer the matter to federal law enforcement for an investigation.  Gianelli is the individual attempting to insert himself into this matter.  I have no idea who this man but understand that he functions as an agent provocateur and infiltrator who has relentlessly targeted me, my sons, family members, friends, and witnesses.  I have relentlessly advised this criminal to cease and desist.

I am aware that Tax Court is an Article I court with specific jurisdiction.  Tax Court clearly has jurisdiction to address any decisions based on fraud upon the court.  I haven't submitted a motion arguing the fraud upon the court or any other issue for that matter.  I provided Tax Court with specific facts, and evidence, and asked for leave to file the motion.  I think I've made the issues quite clear.  That would include, but is not limited to, the fact that Leonard Cohen stole the $1 million from Traditional Holdings, LLC and/or Blue Mist Touring Company, Inc. and the $1 million in no way represented a "loan" from either entity to Leonard Cohen.  He merely has an inconceivable sense of entitlement and views himself as the alter ego of numerous corporate entities and the assets themselves as his personal piggy bank.

I tend to doubt the entire financial system would collapse if someone were actually held accountable for their conduct and believe most taxpayers in this country would overwhelmingly agree.

Stephen Gianelli has no legal right to criminally harass or stalk me over my public opinions posted on my riverdeepbook.blogspot.com blog.  I can assure you that these matters are not "self-manufactured" dramas and that would include the steps on the TH tax returns and other issues related to what definitely appears to be civil and criminal tax fraud on the part of Leonard Cohen.  I will let you personally speak for yourself as I have no intention of following the orders of a common criminal.  I can assure you that these issues are not merely my personal grievances.

I would like to note that Stephen Gianelli views himself as absolutely immune with respect to his own actions.  That may be due to the fact that he appears to have been in bed with both the City Attorney and District Attorney of Los Angeles.  He is also obsessed with Phil Spector's case and Investigator Frayeh immediately concluded that this criminal may have found a sympathetic ear with Spector prosecutor Alan Jackson about me.  See my Show Trial for further details.  Let me end by quoting my public defender with respect to that trial:  the City Attorney is attempting to sabotage IRS; they want to discredit you; and the District Attorney does not want the Spector verdict overturned.  My appellate attorney, who was harassed by Gianelli for over a year, wrote that my trial was a tax fraud case related to Leonard Cohen that demands an IRS investigation.  I personally do not believe this individual, who seems more like an escapee from a criminal mental asylum than a "lawyer," will ever change those facts through his lies, slander, and ongoing criminal conduct.  As I have continuously stated to IRS, FBI, and DOJ:  Stephen Gianelli belongs in prison with many others.


Kelley




---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Stephen R. Gianelli <stephengianelli@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, Nov 29, 2015 at 1:12 PM
Subject: Kelley Lynch's email dated Sun, Nov 29, 2015 at 11:36 AM
To: kelley.lynch.2013@gmail.com
Cc: Paulmikell.A.Fabian@irscounsel.treas.gov


Ms. Lynch,

Responding to your blog posted email (below):

1. I do not represent Leonard Cohen. Indeed, I have never met or spoken with Leonard Cohen. It goes without saying that I don’t even know what he thinks about your tax court petition, or if he has even read it. (I have not.)

2. I did not “tamper with” your blog, nor is your blog a matter of concern to the tax court. Your pattern is to initiate a procedurally defective legal proceeding in some court, and then try to leverage that proceeding to request that the court issue all kinds of orders concerning your perceived enemies that are irrelevant to the proceeding and involve people who are not even parties to the action. You have been doing this for years.

3. The tax court is a court of limited jurisdiction. It’s jurisdiction is defined by Title 26 of the United States Code. Unless a statutory provision expressly invests the tax court with jurisdiction over a particular matter, the tax court has no power to entertain a petition. (Freytag v. Commissioner, 501 U.S. 868, 870-71, 111 S.Ct. 2631, 2634 (1991).) The tax court may NOT invoke  general equitable principles you reference to  expand its jurisdiction. (See Estate of Branson v. Commissioner, 264 F.3d 904, 908 (9th Cir. 2001) [“The Tax Court’s jurisdiction is defined and limited by Title 26 and it may not use general equitable powers to expand its jurisdictional grant beyond this limited Congressional authorization.”]; also see Grospe v. Internal Revenue, 451 f.3d 966, 967 (9th Cir. 2006) [ the tax court is an Article I "court of limited jurisdiction and lacks general equitable powers].)

4. Title 26 requires that the IRS make a final determination and notify you of that determination as a prerequisite to the tax court taking jurisdiction over your petition. Your response (called an “objection” in tax court) to the pending motion to dismiss (posted on your blog), by omission, concedes that you received no notice of determination from the IRS in respect to the matters raised in your petition (e.g., according to the order filed 10/102015, taxable year 1999).  Nor do you point the court to a statutory basis for tax court jurisdiction.

5. Setting all of that aside, what you are trying to do flies in the face of common sense. Our tax and legal systems above all else rely on transparency, predictability and (above all else) finality. If a disgruntled former employee or partner who was never made a party to a tax proceeding could spontaneously come forward – out of the blue – and validly seek to set aside a stipulated decision in a tax court case reached 13-years ago concerning a tax event occurring in 2001 relating to taxable year 1999 (16-years ago), business and individuals could not plan their affairs, and lenders and investors could not assess risk. The entire financial system would collapse. In addition, the tax court would be overwhelmed, and the IRS would be required to spend its time litigating matters long ago resolved instead of performing its Congressional mandate – assessing and collecting federal tax revenue in matters that are within the statute of limitations.

6. You complain about me allegedly trying to “insert” myself into your tax court matter.  But it is you that is trying to litigate your tax court case (along with your other grievances) in the court of public opinion, and it is you that has made multiple filings in your tax court case concerning me, and not the reverse. The legal forums on which you try to impose your personal grievances and self-manufactured drama were not created for such purposes and are busy enough with legitimate court business. The same is true of the opposing counsel whom you flood with unnecessary correspondence daily. Why don’t you give them all a break?

Stephen Gianelli
Crete, Greece

From: Kelley Lynch <kelley.lynch.2013@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, Nov 29, 2015 at 11:36 AM
Subject: Fwd: Standing vs. Jurisdiction
To: Fabian Paulmikell A <Paulmikell.A.Fabian@irscounsel.treas.gov>, "*irs. commissioner" <*IRS.Commissioner@irs.gov>, Washington Field <washington.field@ic.fbi.gov>, ASKDOJ <ASKDOJ@usdoj.gov>, ": Division, Criminal" <Criminal.Division@usdoj.gov>, "Doug.Davis" <Doug.Davis@ftb.ca.gov>, Dennis <Dennis@riordan-horgan.com>, MollyHale <MollyHale@ucia.gov>, nsapao <nsapao@nsa.gov>, fsb <fsb@fsb.ru>, rbyucaipa <rbyucaipa@yahoo.com>, khuvane <khuvane@caa.com>, blourd <blourd@caa.com>, Robert MacMillan <robert.macmillan@gmail.com>, a <anderson.cooper@cnn.com>, wennermedia <wennermedia@gmail.com>, Mick Brown <mick.brown@telegraph.co.uk>, "glenn.greenwald" <glenn.greenwald@firstlook.org>, Harriet Ryan <harriet.ryan@latimes.com>, "hailey.branson" <hailey.branson@latimes.com>, Stan Garnett <stan.garnett@gmail.com>, mike.feuer@lacity.org, "mayor.garcetti" <mayor.garcetti@lacity.org>, Opla-pd-los-occ <OPLA-PD-LOS-OCC@ice.dhs.gov>, "Kelly.Sopko" <Kelly.Sopko@tigta.treas.gov>, Whistleblower <whistleblower@judiciary-rep.senate.gov>, Attacheottawa <AttacheOttawa@ci.irs.gov>, tips@radaronline.com
Mr. Fabian,

The Criminal Stalker continues to represent Leonard Cohen's legal position with respect to Tax Court.  Leonard Cohen is the individual who did not have standing before Tax Court.  By 2002, the Traditional Holdings, LLC transaction had closed and the $1 million was not Leonard Cohen's income.  Nor were there any loan documents between Cohen and TH.  Furthermore, the assets that TH sold to Sony were owned by Blue Mist Touring Company, Inc. and as Cohen's retaliatory Complaint confirms, the assets remain in BMT.  

Stephen Gianelli wants to insert himself into this matter because he clearly represents Leonard Cohen's interests.  I personally think it's rather obvious that Tax Court has the authority to review and address issues related to "fraud upon the court."  And, I believe the appellate courts have been clear that a judgment obtained through fraud upon the court is not a judgment at all and never becomes final.  In fact, the Ninth Circuit in Toscano, citing Kenner, held that the Tax Court possessed the authority to review and vacate an otherwise final judgment on the grounds of fraud upon the court.  A judgment obtained by fraud upon the court is not a judgment at all and is never final.  This is an inconvenient truth for the Criminal Stalker.  In any event, I personally believe Cohen's unofficial legal representative has gotten ahead of himself re. my Tax Court Petition which he has harassed me over for months.  I have asked Tax Court to grant me relief to file a motion addressing the fraud upon the court.  I have provided Tax Court with very specific facts and evidence to support that request.  Of course, someone (most probably Stephen Gianelli) tampered with and altered the blog I created specifically to this matter.  That blog was used to submit evidence to Tax Court.  I have sent you the latest draft of my new declaration which will be submitted to Tax Court in the next few days.  I am absolutely asking Tax Court to refer this criminal conduct to federal law enforcement for an investigation.  I think it is overwhelmingly obvious that this is a very serious situation.  I also think it's obvious that the Criminal Stalker finds his conduct amusing and views himself as absolutely immune.  The man is a chronic liar with motive.

Kelley


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Stephen Gianelli <stephengianelli@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, Nov 29, 2015 at 5:42 AM
Subject: Standing vs. Jurisdiction
To: Kelley Lynch <kelley.lynch.2013@gmail.com>

There is a big difference between the issue of who has the right to file a case, e.g. "standing" as a tax partner to litigate on behalf of a partnership and the tax court's power to hear the case, i.e. "jurisdiction". 

One has nothing to do with the other.

No notice of determination + timely filing thereafter = no jurisdiction, i.e., petition DISMISSED.


You Don't Like Me?


Kelley Lynch's Email to IRS Chief Trial Counsel's Office Re. Tax Court, Leonard Cohen's Unofficial Legal Representative & Criminal Stalker

From: Kelley Lynch <kelley.lynch.2013@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, Nov 29, 2015 at 11:36 AM
Subject: Fwd: Standing vs. Jurisdiction
To: Fabian Paulmikell A <Paulmikell.A.Fabian@irscounsel.treas.gov>, "*irs. commissioner" <*IRS.Commissioner@irs.gov>, Washington Field <washington.field@ic.fbi.gov>, ASKDOJ <ASKDOJ@usdoj.gov>, ": Division, Criminal" <Criminal.Division@usdoj.gov>, "Doug.Davis" <Doug.Davis@ftb.ca.gov>, Dennis <Dennis@riordan-horgan.com>, MollyHale <MollyHale@ucia.gov>, nsapao <nsapao@nsa.gov>, fsb <fsb@fsb.ru>, rbyucaipa <rbyucaipa@yahoo.com>, khuvane <khuvane@caa.com>, blourd <blourd@caa.com>, Robert MacMillan <robert.macmillan@gmail.com>, a <anderson.cooper@cnn.com>, wennermedia <wennermedia@gmail.com>, Mick Brown <mick.brown@telegraph.co.uk>, "glenn.greenwald" <glenn.greenwald@firstlook.org>, Harriet Ryan <harriet.ryan@latimes.com>, "hailey.branson" <hailey.branson@latimes.com>, Stan Garnett <stan.garnett@gmail.com>, mike.feuer@lacity.org, "mayor.garcetti" <mayor.garcetti@lacity.org>, Opla-pd-los-occ <OPLA-PD-LOS-OCC@ice.dhs.gov>, "Kelly.Sopko" <Kelly.Sopko@tigta.treas.gov>, Whistleblower <whistleblower@judiciary-rep.senate.gov>, Attacheottawa <AttacheOttawa@ci.irs.gov>, tips@radaronline.com


Mr. Fabian,

The Criminal Stalker continues to represent Leonard Cohen's legal position with respect to Tax Court.  Leonard Cohen is the individual who did not have standing before Tax Court.  By 2002, the Traditional Holdings, LLC transaction had closed and the $1 million was not Leonard Cohen's income.  Nor were there any loan documents between Cohen and TH.  Furthermore, the assets that TH sold to Sony were owned by Blue Mist Touring Company, Inc. and as Cohen's retaliatory Complaint confirms, the assets remain in BMT.  

Stephen Gianelli wants to insert himself into this matter because he clearly represents Leonard Cohen's interests.  I personally think it's rather obvious that Tax Court has the authority to review and address issues related to "fraud upon the court."  And, I believe the appellate courts have been clear that a judgment obtained through fraud upon the court is not a judgment at all and never becomes final.  In fact, the Ninth Circuit in Toscano, citing Kenner, held that the Tax Court possessed the authority to review and vacate an otherwise final judgment on the grounds of fraud upon the court.  A judgment obtained by fraud upon the court is not a judgment at all and is never final.  This is an inconvenient truth for the Criminal Stalker.  In any event, I personally believe Cohen's unofficial legal representative has gotten ahead of himself re. my Tax Court Petition which he has harassed me over for months.  I have asked Tax Court to grant me relief to file a motion addressing the fraud upon the court.  I have provided Tax Court with very specific facts and evidence to support that request.  Of course, someone (most probably Stephen Gianelli) tampered with and altered the blog I created specifically to this matter.  That blog was used to submit evidence to Tax Court.  I have sent you the latest draft of my new declaration which will be submitted to Tax Court in the next few days.  I am absolutely asking Tax Court to refer this criminal conduct to federal law enforcement for an investigation.  I think it is overwhelmingly obvious that this is a very serious situation.  I also think it's obvious that the Criminal Stalker finds his conduct amusing and views himself as absolutely immune.  The man is a chronic liar with motive.

Kelley


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Stephen Gianelli <stephengianelli@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, Nov 29, 2015 at 5:42 AM
Subject: Standing vs. Jurisdiction
To: Kelley Lynch <kelley.lynch.2013@gmail.com>


There is a big difference between the issue of who has the right to file a case, e.g. "standing" as a tax partner to litigate on behalf of a partnership and the tax court's power to hear the case, i.e. "jurisdiction". 

One has nothing to do with the other.

No notice of determination + timely filing thereafter = no jurisdiction, i.e., petition DISMISSED.