Joan M. Murray and Justin Murray v. United States of America and Gary O. Booth as the District Director for the Internal Revenue Service

Eighth Circuit

Joan M. Murray and Justin Murray v. United States of America and Gary O. Booth as the District Director for the Internal Revenue Service

751 F.2d 271, 61 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 1245, 1984 U.S. App. LEXIS 15564

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

DecidedDecember 28, 1984

Docket84-1776

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 751 F.2d 271 (Joan M. Murray and Justin Murray v. United States of America and Gary O. Booth as the District Director for the Internal Revenue Service) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Joan M. Murray and Justin Murray v. United States of America and Gary O. Booth as the District Director for the Internal Revenue Service, 751 F.2d 271, 61 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 1245, 1984 U.S. App. LEXIS 15564 (8th Cir. 1984).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellants sought $70,000.00 in damages, or, in the alternative, a writ of mandamus compelling the government to convey to them certain real property which they had sought to redeem following its conveyance to the United States at a tax auction. The district court 1 initially dismissed that portion of the appellants’ complaint which sought monetary relief for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Subsequently, the court dismissed the appellants’ request for nonmonetary relief on the basis of FED.R.CIV.P. 12(b)(6), for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. 585 F.Supp. 543 (N.D.1984). This appeal followed.

After examining the briefs, arguments, and record in this ease, including this court’s prior decision in an action filed by the appellants’ brother for the redemption of the property involved here, see Murray v. United States, 686 F.2d 1320 (8th Cir. 1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1147, 103 S.Ct. 788, 74 L.Ed.2d 994 (1983), we believe that the district court’s findings of fact are not clearly erroneous, and that no error of law appears. Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is affirmed. See 8th CIR.R. 14.

1

. The Honorable Paul Benson, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the District of North Dakota.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellants sought $70,000.00 in damages, or, in the alternative, a writ of mandamus compelling the government to convey to them certain real property which they had sought to redeem following its conveyance to the United States at a tax auction. The district court 1 initially dismissed that portion of the appellants’ complaint which sought monetary relief for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Subsequently, the court dismissed the appellants’ request for nonmonetary relief on the basis of FED.R.CIV.P. 12(b)(6), for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. 585 F.Supp. 543 (N.D.1984). This appeal followed.

After examining the briefs, arguments, and record in this ease, including this court’s prior decision in an action filed by the appellants’ brother for the redemption of the property involved here, see Murray v. United States, 686 F.2d 1320 (8th Cir. 1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1147, 103 S.Ct. 788, 74 L.Ed.2d 994 (1983), we believe that the district court’s findings of fact are not clearly erroneous, and that no error of law appears. Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is affirmed. See 8th CIR.R. 14.

1

. The Honorable Paul Benson, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the District of North Dakota.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

751 F.2d 271, 61 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 1245, 1984 U.S. App. LEXIS 15564, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/joan-m-murray-and-justin-murray-v-united-states-of-america-and-gary-o-ca8-1984.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack