Harpole v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
This text of 17 F. App'x 691 (Harpole v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
John-Thomas Harpole appeals pro se the Tax Court’s dismissal under Tax Court Rule 123(b) for failure to prosecute his action challenging the Commissioner of Internal Revenue’s finding of income tax deficiencies and penalties.
The Tax Court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing Harpole’s petition in light of his failure to appear for trial, Edelson v. Commissioner, 829 F.2d 828, 831 (9th Cir.1987), nor in imposing sanctions pursuant to 26 U.S.C. § 6673(a)(1). The Tax Court did not err in denying Harpole’s recusal claim. Liteky v. United States, 510 U.S. 540, 555, 114 S.Ct. 1147, 127 L.Ed.2d 474 (1994); Nobles v. Commissioner, 105 F.3d 436, 438 (9th Cir. 1997).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
17 F. App'x 691, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/harpole-v-commissioner-of-internal-revenue-ca9-2001.