No, I’m neither being politically correct nor waging war on Christmas, I’m just echoing the sentiments of The Judge Who Writes Like a Human Being, a/k/a The Great Dissenter, s/a/k/a The Irrefragable, Irreplaceable, Illustrious, Indefatigable and Industrious Foe of the Partitive Genitive, Judge Mark V. Holmes.

Judge Holmes is concerned with the meaning of the word “seasonable,” and he resolves the parties’ concerns in Caylor Land & Development, Inc., Docket No. 17204-13, filed 11/24/15.

Surely you remember Caylor Land & Development, Inc., and its host of et als. No? Then check out my blogposts “Is You Is Or Is You Ain’t?” 3/27/15, and “Don’t Suppose You Can Depose – Part Deux,” 9/2/14.

Well, apparently Ch J Michael B. (“Iron Mike”) Thornton sorted out the matters I raised in my first-above-referred-to blogpost, and Judge Holmes has this case.

He gave IRS until November 6 to identify their expert who would testify as to actuarial sciences. And on that very day IRS named the chosen one, giving as their reason that they had to satisfy the various bureaucratic obstacles to getting their expert paid.

The Caylor clan objects. “Petitioners argue that Rule 102 says that this duty is to seasonably supplement, and that waiting till the deadline that the Court set in its pretrial order for just this kind of supplementary response is not good enough.” Order, at p. 2. (Emphasis by the Court).

But this fails to answer Judge Holmes’ perfectly reasonable question: “So how does meeting a deadline become missing a deadline?” Order, at p. 1.

So Judge Holmes will tell them. It doesn’t.

“‘Seasonably’ is just an old-fashioned synonym for ‘timely.’ See, e.g., Georgianna Nadeau Henault & Sun Trust Co. v Commissioner, B.T.A.M. (P-H) P 33681 (B.T.A. 1933); Egan v. Commissioner,41 B.T.A. 204, 205 (1940). Rule 102(3) allows the Court by order to impose a duty to supplement, which is what we did and we included a more precise deadline than ‘seasonably.’” Order, at p. 2.

Seasonable greetings.