Stipulation of Facts
In the Branerton case, the court observed that the stipulation process is “the bedrock of Tax Court practice” and acts “as an aid to the more expeditious trial of cases.” In other decisions, Tax Court has said of the stipulation of facts that it “eliminates burdensome and unnecessary discovery,” that it “narrows controversies to their essential issues of dispute,” and that it further “materially assists the Court in managing its caseload.” It’s hard to overstate the importance of the Stipulation of Facts. Under Tax Court Rule 91, the parties are “required to stipulate, to the fullest extent to which complete or qualified agreement can or fairly should be reached….” to all the relevant facts and documents. Negotiations can begin anytime concerning what will be included in the SOF. Though generally settled beforehand, negotiations on the SOF can continue right up until the trial begins. It often happens that the parties stipulate to all facts and submit the case to the court for a decision under Tax Court Rule 122. In such cases, a trial is not necessary. (Remember, the purpose of the trial is to establish the facts. If all facts are agreed, there’s no need for a trial.) Then, the court applies the law to the agreed facts to reach a decision. Once both parties have signed the SOF, ...
