Connors v. Internal Revenue Service

Fourth Circuit

Connors v. Internal Revenue Service

314 F. App'x 612

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedMarch 3, 2009

DocketNo. 08-2154

StatusPublished

This text of 314 F. App'x 612 (Connors v. Internal Revenue Service) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Connors v. Internal Revenue Service, 314 F. App'x 612 (4th Cir. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

[613]*613Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

John Connors appeals from the tax court’s orders upholding the Commissioner’s proposed collection activities with respect to his tax liability for the 2004 tax year, and denying his motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the tax court. See Connors v. Internal Revenue Serv., No. 19571-07L (U.S.T.C. July 14, 2008 & filed Sept. 15, 2008; entered Sept. 16, 2008). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

[613]*613Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

John Connors appeals from the tax court’s orders upholding the Commissioner’s proposed collection activities with respect to his tax liability for the 2004 tax year, and denying his motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the tax court. See Connors v. Internal Revenue Serv., No. 19571-07L (U.S.T.C. July 14, 2008 & filed Sept. 15, 2008; entered Sept. 16, 2008). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

314 F. App'x 612, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/connors-v-internal-revenue-service-ca4-2009.