DiPierdomenico v. U.S.

ADDITIONAL CASES John DiPierdomenico and Andrea DiPierdomenico, Plaintiffs, v. United States of America, Defendant; 19-CV-4008 MEMORANDUM & ORDER   Plaintiffs John DiPierdomenico and Andrea DiPierdomenico (“Plaintiffs”) commenced these actions against defendant the United States of America (“Defendant”) under Section 7422 of the Internal Revenue Code seeking a refund of income taxes for tax years 2006 and 2007. (See Case No. 19-CV-0854 (the “2006 Action”), Compl., D.E. 1 (asserting claims arising out of tax year 2006); Case No. 19-CV-4008 (the “2007 Action”), Compl., D.E. 1 (asserting claims arising out of tax year 2007).) Currently before the Court are the parties’ cross-motions for judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c). (See 2006 Action, Def. Mot., D.E. 24; Pls. Mot., D.E. 27; see 2007 Action, Def. Mot., D.E. 22; Pls. Mot., D.E. 25.)¹ For the reasons set forth below, Defendant’s motion is GRANTED and Plaintiffs’ crossmotion is DENIED. FACTUAL BACKGROUND² I. Plaintiffs’ Power of Attorney On or around July 13, 2010, Plaintiffs signed a Power of Attorney (“POA”) covering tax years 2006 through 2009 in favor of Alan J. Garfunkel, Esq. (“Mr. Garfunkel”) arising out of an IRS investigation into their income tax returns. (Compl.

7-8; POA, Ex. A to the 2007 Action Compl., D.E. 1-1.) The POA provides, among other things, that “[o]riginal notices and other written communications will be sent to [Plaintiffs] and a copy to the first representative listed,” i.e., Alan J. Garfunkel. (POA §7.) II. Mr. DiPierdomenico’s Conviction On December 30, 2014, Plaintiff John DiPierdomenico (“Mr. DiPierdomenico”) waived criminal indictment and pled guilty to one count of falsely subscribing to a 2008 tax return in violation of 26 U.S.C. §7206(1) before the undersigned. (See United States v. DiPierdomenico, No. 14-CR-0659, Min. Entry, D.E. 5; see also id., D.E. 3 (Information); D.E. 4 (Waiver of Indictment).) Mr. DiPierdomenico entered into a plea agreement with the Government whereby he agreed that “restitution with respect to [his] tax liabilities,” subject to Court approval, was $185,082.00. (Plea Agmt., Ex. A to Def. Mot., D.E. 24-2,