May it please the Court, just Google it
Petitioner asserts in a posttrial memorandum that he was "duped by a charlatan and in essence Robert Gruntz tacitly implied that I should fabricate a log that would show 'material participation'". Petitioners assert that the liability would be a financial burden for their family and "petition the Court to consider reducing the liability, throwing [themselves] at the mercy of the court." They conclude with: "Just Google Robert Gruntz to see more."[Via TaxProf Blog.]This Court cannot reduce a liability without any basis in law and directly contrary to the law applicable to the facts appearing from the record in this case. We cannot "Google" or otherwise consider information outside of the record.
| Posted at 9:47 AM | Permalink |
|
Comments (3)
The perils of going "Pro Sese".
Posted by G Joubert | September 2, 2009 10:35 AM
Oddly, a few cases have cited Wikipedia though . . .
Posted by George Anonymuncule Seldes | September 2, 2009 11:24 AM
The courts always struggle to keep up with changes in technology be it the original liability rulings involving automobles (which now look crazy) to the original issues with hacking to..... this. Not that I have very much faith in the US legal system. I don't. It's why I decided to not pursue a legal career beyond one year of law school and why I will do my best to get kicked off any criminal jury (not difficult with my personal beliefs about cops (Mick Jagger tagged them best) and prosecutors). I have a conscientious objection to participating in the delivery of injustice from a flawed system where money or lack of it seems to purchase legal outcomes.
Posted by LucsAdvo | September 2, 2009 3:29 PM