Jeffrey Rische v. Cir
This text of Jeffrey Rische v. Cir (Jeffrey Rische v. Cir) 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
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JAN 24 2024 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JEFFREY ALAN RISCHE, No. 23-70011
Petitioner-Appellant, Tax Ct. No. 1617-19
v. MEMORANDUM* COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE,
Respondent-Appellee.
Appeal from a Decision of the United States Tax Court
Submitted January 24, 2024**
Before: BENNETT, BADE, and COLLINS, Circuit Judges.
Jeffrey Alan Rische appeals pro se from the tax court’s denial of his motion
for summary judgment and grant of summary judgment in favor of the
Commissioner of Internal Revenue. Rische also appeals the tax court’s imposition
of sanctions under 26 U.S.C. § 6673. We have jurisdiction under 26 U.S.C.
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). § 7482(a)(1). We review the tax court’s grant and denial of summary judgment de
novo. Sollberger v. Comm’r, 691 F.3d 1119, 1123 (9th Cir. 2012). The tax court’s
decision to award sanctions is reviewed for abuse of discretion. Liti v. Comm’r, 289
F.3d 1103, 1105 (9th Cir. 2002). We affirm.
The tax court properly granted summary judgment to the Commissioner,
because Rische failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to the amount of
his income in 2015 or the taxability of earnings he received in exchange for services
he performed, and his arguments were frivolous. See Grimes v. Comm’r, 806 F.2d
1451, 1453 (9th Cir. 1986) (reiterating that tax on income is constitutional and
earnings fall within the meaning of taxable income). The tax court properly imposed
sanctions on Rische for his continued presentation of frivolous arguments. See
Olson v. United States, 760 F.2d 1003, 1005 (9th Cir. 1985) (affirming penalty for
filing a frivolous “zero income” return).
As to the Commissioner’s motion for sanctions, the Commissioner represents
the requested lump-sum sanction of $8,000 is reasonable in light of the average cost
the Tax Division of the Department of Justice incurred in litigating similar frivolous
taxpayer appeals from 2009-2011. Rische does not contest the reasonableness of
$8,000, nor does he present any argument as to the Commissioner’s calculation of
an appropriate sanction. As we have held in the past, a sanction in the amount of
$8,000 is reasonable and appropriate. See Banister v. Comm’r, 664 F. App’x 673,
2 674 (9th Cir. 2016) (granting motion for $8,000 in sanctions); Carlson v. Comm’r,
604 F. App’x 628 (9th Cir. 2015) (same); Bates v. United States, 401 F. App’x 247,
248 (9th Cir. 2010) (same). Therefore, the Commissioner’s July 31, 2023 motion
for $8,000 in sanctions is granted. See Fed. R. App. P. 38; Grimes, 806 F.2d at 1454
(“Sanctions are appropriate when the result of an appeal is obvious and the
arguments of error are wholly without merit.”).
AFFIRMED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Jeffrey Rische v. Cir, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jeffrey-rische-v-cir-ca9-2024.