1st Circuit rerites Attorney-Client Privlege

Taxes General Forum - Tax professionals meeting place and answers to queries. (Moderated) 

Yahoo!   Google   Windows Live   del.icio.us   digg   Netscape

Subject Author Date 1st Circuit rerites Attorney-Client Privlege Dick Adams 08-23-2009  Re: 1st Circuit rerites Attorney-Client Privlege HLunsford 08-24-2009  Re: 1st Circuit rerites Attorney-Client Privlege Dick Adams 08-24-2009  Re: 1st Circuit rerites Attorney-Client Privlege HLunsford 08-25-2009  Re: 1st Circuit rerites Attorney-Client Privlege Dick Adams 08-26-2009
Posted by Dick Adams on August 23, 2009, 5:54 pm Please log in for more thread options The gist of this is that a tax attorney prepared some accounting schedules and does not want to release them to the IRS. An opinion from the 1st Circuit says that work product is not covered by Attorney-Client Privlege. My money says this is going to be overturned when it gets to Johnny and the Supremes. Below is one paragraph from the opinion on FindLaw. You can read the opinion and the dissent at tinyurl.com/nqm9r8. Those of you are are suspicious of Nu Yawkers should take note the FindLaw is far enough away from Nu Yawk City that even people on the Georgia-Alabama Line should feel safe. >From US V Textron: "To sum up, the work product privilege is aimed at protecting work done for litigation, not in preparing financial statements. Textron's work papers were prepared to support financial filings and gain auditor approval; the compulsion of the securities laws and auditing requirements assure that they will be carefully prepared, in their present form, even though not protected; and IRS access serves the legitimate, and important, function of detecting and disallowing abusive tax shelters." Dick -- << ------------------------------------------------------- >> << The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, >> << nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties >> << that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. >> << >> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts >> << to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy >> << are at www.asktax.org. >> << Copyright (2007) - All rights reserved. >> << ------------------------------------------------------- >> Posted by HLunsford on August 24, 2009, 2:02 pm Please log in for more thread options Dick Adams wrote: > The gist of this is that a tax attorney prepared some accounting > schedules and does not want to release them to the IRS. An > opinion from the 1st Circuit says that work product is not > covered by Attorney-Client Privlege. > > My money says this is going to be overturned when it gets to > Johnny and the Supremes. > > Below is one paragraph from the opinion on FindLaw. You can read > the opinion and the dissent at tinyurl.com/nqm9r8. > > Those of you are are suspicious of Nu Yawkers should take note > the FindLaw is far enough away from Nu Yawk City that even > people on the Georgia-Alabama Line should feel safe. > >>From US V Textron: > "To sum up, the work product privilege is aimed at protecting > work done for litigation, not in preparing financial statements. > Textron's work papers were prepared to support financial filings > and gain auditor approval; the compulsion of the securities laws > and auditing requirements assure that they will be carefully > prepared, in their present form, even though not protected; and > IRS access serves the legitimate, and important, function of > detecting and disallowing abusive tax shelters." > > Dick > I shall not recuse myself from ruling on this case and shall disagree with my learned colleague from Murryland in that the U S Supreme court will either not docket the case, or if they do, will uphold the lower court ruling. Affirmed; for the 1st circuit court. My seal: HFL -- << ------------------------------------------------------- >> << The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, >> << nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties >> << that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. >> << >> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts >> << to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy >> << are at www.asktax.org. >> << Copyright (2007) - All rights reserved. >> << ------------------------------------------------------- >> Posted by Dick Adams on August 24, 2009, 8:56 pm Please log in for more thread options > Dick Adams wrote: >> The gist of this is that a tax attorney prepared some accounting >> schedules and does not want to release them to the IRS. An >> opinion from the 1st Circuit says that work product is not >> covered by Attorney-Client Privlege. >> >> My money says this is going to be overturned when it gets to >> Johnny and the Supremes. >> ... >> You can read the opinion and the dissent at tinyurl.com/nqm9r8. >> >> Those of you are are suspicious of Nu Yawkers should take note >> the FindLaw is far enough away from Nu Yawk City that even >> people on the Georgia-Alabama Line should feel safe. >> ... > I shall not recuse myself from ruling on this case and shall > disagree with my learned colleague from Murryland in that the > U S Supreme court will either not docket the case, or if they do, > will uphold the lower court ruling. > ... I must ask if my learned colleague read both the opinion and the dissent? If so, an explanation of the basis of his opinion will be appreciated. It is important to note that I am not from Murryland. But rather am a Tarheel and Murryland is where the truck broke down. If not for 13 surgeries over the last six years, I would be sleeping tonight in the Promised Land of North Carolina. Dick -- << ------------------------------------------------------- >> << The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, >> << nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties >> << that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. >> << >> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts >> << to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy >> << are at www.asktax.org. >> << Copyright (2007) - All rights reserved. >> << ------------------------------------------------------- >> Posted by HLunsford on August 25, 2009, 1:22 pm Please log in for more thread options Dick Adams wrote: > >> I shall not recuse myself from ruling on this case and shall >> disagree with my learned colleague from Murryland in that the >> U S Supreme court will either not docket the case, or if they do, >> will uphold the lower court ruling. >> ... > > I must ask if my learned colleague read both the opinion and the > dissent? If so, an explanation of the basis of his opinion will > be appreciated. heck! Don't confuse me with the facts. IRS can simply audit the return and deny any deductions not supported by fully disclosed documents. > > It is important to note that I am not from Murryland. But rather > am a Tarheel and Murryland is where the truck broke down. If not > for 13 surgeries over the last six years, I would be sleeping > tonight in the Promised Land of North Carolina. While I always recognize that we are perpetual citizens of the state in which we are born (I AM a Georgian!), fact is that you now "stay" in Murryland. "Stay" is an old Southern word which denotes residence, temporary or otherwise. ChEAr$, Harlan -- << ------------------------------------------------------- >> << The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, >> << nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties >> << that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. >> << >> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts >> << to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy >> << are at www.asktax.org. >> << Copyright (2007) - All rights reserved. >> << ------------------------------------------------------- >> Posted by Dick Adams on August 26, 2009, 7:17 am Please log in for more thread options > Dick Adams wrote: >>> I shall not recuse myself from ruling on this case and shall >>> disagree with my learned colleague from Murryland in that the >>> U S Supreme court will either not docket the case, or if they do, >>> will uphold the lower court ruling. >>> ... >> I must ask if my learned colleague read both the opinion and the >> dissent? If so, an explanation of the basis of his opinion will >> be appreciated. > heck! Don't confuse me with the facts. IRS can simply audit the > return and deny any deductions not supported by fully disclosed > documents. May we infer from that that you have read neither the opinion nor the dissent? Possibily you have been distrated by the crashing of your damnyankee Cubs aka the Chicago Chokers This case is not about supporting documentation. It is about the work product of an attorney that was prepared for litigation. >> It is important to note that I am not from Murryland. But rather >> am a Tarheel and Murryland is where the truck broke down. If not >> for 13 surgeries over the last six years, I would be sleeping >> tonight in the Promised Land of North Carolina. > While I always recognize that we are perpetual citizens of the state > in which we are born (I AM a Georgian!), fact is that you now "stay" > in Murryland. "Stay" is an old Southern word which denotes residence, > temporary or otherwise. Being a Southerner is a privilege. But being a Southerner has nothing to do with where you were born or raised, or where you currently live, It has to do with the respect and the kindness with which you treat people as in treating strangers like kin. Now go read the opinion and the dissent. Dick -- << ------------------------------------------------------- >> << The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, >> << nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties >> << that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. >> << >> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts >> << to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy >> << are at www.asktax.org. >> << Copyright (2007) - All rights reserved. >> << ------------------------------------------------------- >> Similar Threads Posted D.C. Circuit Reverses Itself in Tax Ruling July 4, 2007, 10:57 pm 6th Circuit Opinion On Who Is Exempt from FICA February 28, 2009, 11:19 am "Traveling Away From Home" Court Case 7th Circuit January 27, 2009, 11:44 am