Sandra Mazer Moss

When the Legal Intelligencer asked me to write a monthly column on reinventing myself after retirement five years ago, I thought “OK. That's good for one or two articles, not more for sure.”

Three years later, I was still reinventing myself and still writing my monthly column. Then I took a breather and now two years later the Legal has, once again, asked me to initiate my column. And I have come to realize that I am still reinventing myself, often on a daily basis.

Transitioning from 30-plus years as a judge in The First Judicial District of Pennsylvania, has its ups and downs. It's a shock the first time you pass a lawyer on the street who says “Hi judge” and you realize he's not talking to you; or the first time no one pushes you ahead in the drink line at the Chancellor's Reception.

On the other hand there are benefits to transitioning from the bench into real life. One of the best is that you get your First Amendment rights back. After 30 years of being neutral and keeping my feelings to myself, I can now speak up on any issue I like.

Recently, I spoke out at a Board of Governor's meeting on an issue involving the criminal courts and the board ask me to testify on the issue at a city council meeting. Imagine that.

However, the most rewarding (Don Quixote) moment I have had since leaving the bench was my battle against the “forces of evil” at the Philadelphia Department of Revenue—all  over $140.68.

I am a conscientious and responsible taxpayer. I have never paid my real estate taxes late. In fact, I always paid my real estate taxes early to get the “early bird” discount. My tax bill usually comes in January or February and is due by April. Except, in 2018 it did not come at all. I know because I was on the lookout for it. January and February came and went. So did March and April.

I waited and waited to no avail until May 7. Then I finally got a tax bill, stating I was delinquent.  It was dated May 1, 2018, and not only did it state that I had to pay the maximum amount (no discount now) but it also stated I had to pay $140.68 in interest.

I was annoyed. The fault was theirs, not mine. If they had sent me a bill I would have gladly paid it. Well maybe not gladly, but I would have paid it and early, too. So I promptly paid the bill in full except for the $140.68 in interest. On the bill I explained that I had not received anything until the late notice and I advised them that I was seeking a waiver.

After searching for two hours I finally found the waiver of interest form. I filled it out and sent it, along with my tax bill and a copy of my check, to the Department of Revenue. To my great dismay, the Department of Revenue declined to grant me the waiver and, instead, threatened to add penalties to the interest already assessed,

As a judge I would have given up the fight as unseemly for a public official. But I was a private citizen now. I was determined to be heard and vindicated. So I timely appealed and requested a hearing. The request was granted and a hearing was scheduled for November 2018. This did not deter the Department of Revenue. Each month beginning in June I received threatening letters from the Department of Revenue increasing the penalties and eventually placing a $95 lien on my house. I responded each month with a pleasant note reminding them of my due process rights under the Constitution of the United States, my timely appeal and accused them of harassment. However, in October 2018, only weeks before my hearing, I received a different letter from my friends at The Department of Revenue. This one informed me that they were canceling my November 2018 hearing as it was premature. They said I couldn't challenge a 2018 ruling until 2019. So they rescheduled the hearing until late January 2019. Of course, this did not stop the Department of Revenue from sending me three more bills and threatening penalties.

Finally, on Jan. 25, 2019, my hearing date finally arrived. I was super prepared. I had a packet of materials with every letter, bill and every other document I could find, including a copy of my pristine tax record. Moreover, I had three copies of same—one for the hearing officer, one for the city representative and an extra one for anyone else who might appear to challenge me. I also had a relatively short but hugely compelling oral argument which I rehearsed several times before my husband. He was very impressed.

On Jan. 25, 2019, I appeared at the office of the Department of Revenue one hour early, 12 o'clock for my 1 o'clock  hearing. This gave me the opportunity to watch the hearing officer eat his lunch on the bench while I discreetly ate two breakfast bars I had brought along for mine.

At 1 o'clock sharp the proceedings commenced. The hearing officer called us to order, the city representatives took their seats and the first case was called. It didn't go too well for her. But I was still optimistic.

Since there were several “no shows” ahead of me, my case was called next. I took my seat at the table, distributed my hearing packets and proceeded to plead my case. I got about one and a half minutes into my presentation when the hearing officer cut me off.

“Why is she here,” he asked the city representative. “Didn't she pay her taxes?” “Yes,” she replied, “May 10. However she owes interest and penalties and a lien.” “Well I can waive the penalties and lien,” he said. “What about the interest?”

“You can't  waive the interest owed,” she said. “Once 2018 was over the interest became principle and cannot be waived.”

“Wait a minute,” I blurted out. “My 2018 hearing was cancelled as premature. Now at my 2019 hearing you are telling me I'm too late?”

“Yes,” she replied. “You cannot challenge the interest in 2019 because it is now principle.”

“But in 2018, when the interest was still interest, you would not give me a hearing because it was too early.” I was trying to be reasonable.

“I understand your logic,” the hearing officer interrupted. “I will waive penalties and lien but I must find against you on the interest issue. Your interest is now principle.”

“Would you be offended if I appealed to the full board,” I asked respectfully.”There seems to be a serious due process issue here.”

“Be my guest,” he said, and he smiled.

I left the hearing room and went directly to Mount Olympus, the offices of the “evil” Department of Revenue itself. I marched in and demanded to see a deputy city solicitor in charge of delinquent tax bills. I announced myself as Judge Moss, newly retired. After about half an hour, a deputy city solicitor did appear and she very politely listened to my tale of woe and looked at my packet of evidence. My short, but compelling, presentation stretched a little longer as I added the double whammy too early/too late due process argument. In conclusion, I vowed to right this wrong by taking my due process issue to the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania if I had to.

“Don't do that,” she pleaded as I rested my case. “I have a better idea. What if the city wrote off the $140.68 in interest? Would that satisfy you?”

“Done,” I said. I shook her hand, asked for confirmation in writing and was gone before she could change her mind.

Being a private citizen with all the rights and benefits of same is fine. But sometimes throwing your weight around doesn't hurt either.

Sandra Mazer Moss, retired, served on the bench as a trial judge, judicial team leader, and most notably, was the founder and first supervising judge of the Complex Litigation Center. She now works as a distinguished neutral for The Dispute Resolution Institute.