I re-learned a valuable lesson today. The first time I learned the lesson was when a former student in a class on Real Estate Taxation at University of Houston Law School taught it to me. As I was pontificating (close but not the same as blustering or bluffing), a student asked a question. I said that I can’t answer that question, but she and I could walk through the steps to get to the right answer. (I was going to use it as a teaching experience for the student and myself.) Another student jumped in to say something to the effect that “Mr. Townsend, you don’t have to guess at the answer, it is right here in the book.” Oops. After that I repeated that anecdote to every class urging them to jump in at appropriate times to move the class along. (The student who called me out was one of my best ever, but claimed much later that he did not recall the incident; you can be sure that I did because it caused instant but temporary embarrassment which I got over.)
Earlier this week, a similar phenomenon occurred. I read another lawyer's blog on the starting date for measuring the statute of limitations for erroneous tax refund suits. (I know, yawn!) The blog discussed a case that made no sense to me. So, I responded with off-the-cuff, unresearched, reasoning that suggested the case was wrong and nonsensical. I offered no authority to support my claim. Today, I decided to explore that claim that I so off-handedly made. I worked through the cases and discovered after spending considerable time in writing my own blog (below) on that issue that my off-the-cuff comment was correct. And then, after completing my blog on the subject, I decided to check my own book on Federal Tax Procedure and found that I had nailed that issue before years ago in a footnote – footnote 1044 – in the book. Oops again. So, I did a mea culpa and comment in that new blog entry: When Does the Statute of Limitations Start on the Erroneous Refund Suit? (Federal Tax Procedure Blog 4/29/21), here.
