Tax_Counsel

Members
  • Content count

    18,505
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Tax_Counsel

  • Rank
    Platinum Contributor
  1. Note that the mortgage lien on the home is simply security for the loan you took out and that your father co-signed. If the loan could not be collected by enforcing the lien on the property the lender could have, prior to the bankruptcy, gone after both you and your father personally for the loan and once it had a judgement against you could have attached any other non exempt assets or income you had to collect. Your bankruptcy stripped the lien on the property, making it no longer possible to proceed to collect the balance from foreclosing the lien. You presumably got a discharge for your obligation on the loan due to the bankruptcy. But your bankruptcy would not have relieved your father of his obligation on the loan. He would have had to file bankruptcy himself if he wanted a discharge of his debt.
  2. A CP503 letter is NOT a notice of deficiency. The term notice of deficiency has a very specific meaning in the tax law. A notice of deficiency is a notice that the IRS proposes to make an assessment of tax against the taxpayer for income tax, estate, or gift tax and provides the taxpayer 90 days in which to protest that proposed assessment to the U.S. Tax Court. If the taxpayer fails to file a proper protest with the Tax Court in that 90 days, the IRS will assess the tax against the taxpayer and send out a bill to the taxpayer for the amount owed, including penalties and interest that relate to that assessment. If the taxpayer fails to pay in full or fails to make payment arrangements for the assessment, further billing notices are sent, usually by the Service Center, one of those collection letters being CP 503. These letters are not signed and no law requires them to be signed. After the CP 503, if the taxpayer fails to pay the tax owed, the IRS will send a CP 504 or L1058 (depending on which office sends it) that is a final demand for payment prior to levy action being taken to collect the tax liability. That letter is sent by certified mail and gives the taxpayer 30 days to pay, to make arrangements to pay, or to file an appeal with the IRS appeals office to protest the proposed levy action. The bottom line here is that when a CP503 is received, the IRS has already assessed the tax, either tax as reported by the taxpayer himself/herself on the return that was not paid or due to an adjustment the IRS has made after the notice of deficiency was issued and either (1) the taxpayer failed to file a timely protest in the Tax Court or (2) the taxpayer did protest the assessment and lost in the courts. Reading your post it is clear that you do not understand the IRS audit, assessment, and collection process very well and you might well benefit from discussing this matter with a tax professional (tax attorney, CPA, or enrolled agent). You are not fully understanding what you are reading and the significance of the various letters and notices that have been sent to you, and that lack of understanding may hinder you in properly resolving the problem.
  3. The details matter. When you say that it discriminates because of gender, what exactly do mean? You are a member so obviously the problem isn’t that you were denied membership because of your gender. And is the problem that you are a woman and are being treated differently then the men in the club or something different? Exactly what is it that the club is doing? Understand that federal law does not prohibit discrimination on the basis of sex by places of public accommodation. But Illinois law does prohibit discrimination on the basis of sex and sexual orientation, among other things. So if there is a violation here, it one of state law. You may wish to contact the state Human Rights Commission for help in understanding your rights and what the process is if you feel your rights have been violated.
  4. The problem is that the officers do not have to tell you what their probable cause was at the time of the search. They do have to justify it in court if the search is challenged, however. One potentially complicating fact is that you apparently admitted to the officer voluntarily that you had a gun on you.
  5. That depends on the details of what the child does, whether the child is competent or not (and if not, are the parents the court appointed guardian for the child) and what involvement, if any, the parents had with whatever the child does. For an obvious example, if the child robs a liquor store and the parent acts as the driver of the get away car, of course the parent can be charged along with the child for the robbery. Bottom line is that the best answer I can give to such an open ended question is that in some circumstances the parents would be criminally and/or civilly liable and in others they would not be. If you provide specific details of something that has happened you might get more useful replies.
  6. Understand that Jack was being a bit sarcastic. While local police departments may have a list of the confidential informants they use, they won't have a list for the whole state. And again, the police are not going to give you the list of their informants just for the asking. Confidential informants are not public information. If you are being prosecuted for a crime you may be able through discovery find out confidential informants used in your particular case, but there is a specific process for that. You don’t just walk into a police department and ask for it.
  7. If all you did was give that FU reply you have committed no crime. Apparently some of the parents have forgotten what they should have learned in high school about the First Amendment’s protection of free speech. The parents may be offended and upset, but the First Amendment allows for speech that is offensive.
  8. The state does not keep such a list and even if it did, it wouldn’t give it to you just because you asked for it. After all, the word confidential means that these persons are not revealed to the public.
  9. You won't get that. First, unless the defendant himself seeks to overturn the original plea agreement and vacate the sentence that previous conviction will stand. That being the case, double jeopardy prevents the state from trying him on murder charges now since he was already convicted of a crime for that particular death. If the state didn't have a strong enough case to want to go to trial on murder charges 20 years ago, what makes you think the case would be any stronger now?
  10. The answer depends in part on the law of the state in which this occurred, and you did not specify the state. It also may matter if the defendant is still serving prison time or is on parole now, or whether he or she has served the complete sentence that was imposed. It may be that the defendant could seek to have the plea set aside and the conviction vacated based on the new scientific evidence. But if he/she did that, the state would be able to oppose the petition by asserting some other theory of how the person could have committed that crime if there was evidence to support it.
  11. Contact an Illinois civil litigation attorney about it. In your case you are saying that the debt originated with New Century and then passed to Countrywide when it bought New Century and then next to BoA when it bought Countrywide. I think you’ll very likely have no success arguing that BoA did not get ownership of the mortgage in that series of corporate acquisitions. There was no requirement that they provide you a copy of the merger agreements as proof that the mortgage was taken over in each of the mergers at the time they occurred. Unless you have some real basis to believe that your mortgage did not get acquired in each merger I think you’d simply waste time and money chasing something on this theory.
  12. I suspect that part of the problem here is that you do not have a good understanding of the law in this area. You cited Internal Revenue Code (IRC) IRC § 1398 as specifying a rule regarding distribution of assets in bankruptcy. That section does not address that at all. IRC § 1398 only provides rules for how the bankrupt estate shall be taxed on the income it has. That’s it. The claim to the assets of the bankrupt estate are set by the bankruptcy code (Title 11 of the U.S. Code), not by the tax code.
  13. Feel free to contact a Texas civil litigation attorney about your wish to sue for defamation the first hospital and/or the doctor there that called CPS. However, I think you’ll find that you do not have a good case for defamation. Defamation requires a false statement of FACT about you to another person that damages your reputation. Statements of opinion are not defamatory regardless of how negative or damaging they may be. In most cases you also must have suffered some kind of legally recognized harm (e.g. financial loss, etc) from the defamation. If all the doctor told CPS was that you were taking the child out of the hospital against medical advice and that in his medical opinion that posed a risk to the child then he has made no false statements of fact. After all, you did take the child out of the hospital against their advice and so far as it appears it was his opinion that it would pose a risk to the child to do that. There is also another possible hurdle. In many states reports to CPS are highly privileged to encourage people to report suspected abuse. If that is the case in Texas that privilege might prevent a defamation suit here even before getting into the traditional defamation analysis that I described above.
  14. First let me point out that having an associate degree in psychology is a far cry from the knowledge and skills a licensed psychologists have. You do not have the skills necessary to make any medical mental health diagnosis and the school certainly had no obligation to regard you as any kind of expert in the area. So tossing around claims like munchausen by proxy, etc., in that meeting was almost certainly going to result in escalating confrontation in the meeting rather than trying to work towards agreement on what is best to do with the child. If the child was truly acting out and violent in school, that has to be dealt with not only for the good of the child but for the good of the other kids that are being harmed by the child’s actions. I'm also going to guess that the view of that meeting by the other participants to it is vastly different from yours and it is quite possible that your own bias in the matter prevents you from seeing it objectively. You may well have crossed the line into harassment in your eagerness to state your position and do what you thought was needed for the child. There is no eminent domain issue here. Eminent domain is a situation in which the government takes your property for public use. When that occurs the federal constitution guarantees you a right to compensation from the government. Your kid is not property and nothing in your post indicates that any property of yours is being taken by the government. Child custody, visitation, and related matters are matters for state courts. You cannot pursue such claims in federal court. You have not said anything in your post that suggests any viable tort claim. If you had a good tort claim, you could bring it in federal court if your damages exceed $75,000 and you are a resident of a different state than all the defendants in the case. This is known as diversity jurisdiction. If even one defendant resides in your same state then that kills diversity jurisdiction. If there was diversity jurisdiction here and you wanted to use federal court, it would have to be federal court in Connecticut, not Georgia. That is the state where the defendants are located and where all the relevant events took place. The police may always ASK to do a search. Whether the police may do the search over your objection is where the federal and state court decisions about searches come into play. You evidently agreed to the pat-down so there is no legal issue to pursue here. Being “emotionally distressed” during a meeting about your child does not give rise to a good tort claim. Lots of conflicts in life can cause stress and even emotional distress. Very few of them are the basis for a good lawsuit. What I see from your post largely boils down to conflict with the mother and the school over how the child should be treated. You resolve those issues in the Connecticut state courts.
  15. All you can do is answer the questions that are put to you by the lawyers who are trying the case. If you try to offer testimony that goes beyond what is asked, you are likely to get a warning from the judge and if you continue to try to do it you'll get hit with contempt sanctions.