DeAngelis v. CIR

574 F.3d 789

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
• Decided: July 21, 2009
• Docket: Docket Nos. 08-1143-ag (L), 08-3357-ag (XAP), 08-3360-ag (XAP), 08-3361-ag (XAP), 08-3367-ag (XAP), 08-3376-ag (XAP)
• Status: Published

Opinion

574 F.3d 789 (2009)

V.R. DeANGELIS M.D., P.C., R.T. Domingo M.D., P.C., V.R. DeAngelis M.D., P.C., Tax Matters Partner, Vincent DeAngelis, Jeanette DeAngelis, Rodolfo Domingo, Bernadette Domingo, Keith Durante, Kathleen Durante, Anthony J. Capizzi, Mary Ann Capizzi, Petitioners-Appellants-Cross-Appellees,
v.
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent-Appellee-Cross-Appellant.

Docket Nos. 08-1143-ag (L), 08-3357-ag (XAP), 08-3360-ag (XAP), 08-3361-ag (XAP), 08-3367-ag (XAP), 08-3376-ag (XAP).

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

Argued: May 29, 2009. Decided: July 21, 2009.

Ira B. Stechel, Wormser, Kiely, Galef & Jacobs LLP, New York, N.Y. (John T. Morin and Jennifer L. Marlborough, on the brief) for Petitioners-Appellants-Cross-Appellees.

Randolph L. Hutter, Attorney, for John DiCicco, Acting Assistant Attorney General, Tax Division, Department of Justice, Washington, DC (Kenneth L. Greene, Attorney, on the brief) for Respondent-Appellee-Cross-Appellant.

Before: LEVAL, POOLER, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

We affirm the orders of the Tax Court for the reasons stated in its decision. See V.R. DeAngelis M.D.P.C. v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue, 94 T.C.M. (CCH) 526 (2007), a copy of which is annexed to this opinion as an appendix. We have considered petitioners' arguments for a contrary result and found them to lack merit.

APPENDIX