Justyn Kozikowski v. Commissioner of IRS

Eighth Circuit

Justyn Kozikowski v. Commissioner of IRS

258 F. App'x 60

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

DecidedNovember 15, 2007

Docket07-1281

StatusUnpublished

This text of 258 F. App'x 60 (Justyn Kozikowski v. Commissioner of IRS) 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

Justyn Kozikowski v. Commissioner of IRS, 258 F. App'x 60 (8th Cir. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Justyn Kozikowski appeals the tax court’s 1 dismissal of his action challenging the result of a collection due process hearing relating to tax deficiencies. Upon de novo review, we agree with the tax court that Kozikowski failed to state a plausible or cognizable claim for relief. See Wilcox v. Comm’r of Internal Revenue, 848 F.2d 1007, 1008 (9th Cir.1988) (de novo standard of review); Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, — U.S. -, -, 127 S.Ct. 1955, 1974, 167 L.Ed.2d 929 (2007) (complaint must plead enough facts to state claim for relief that is plausible); Yuen v. Comm’r of Internal Revenue, 92 T.C.M. (CCH) 1, 3 (2006) (argument is frivolous where it is “contrary to established law and unsupported by a reasoned, colorable argument for change in the law”); May v. Comm’r of Internal Revenue, 752 F.2d 1301, 1303-04 & n. 3 (8th Cir.1985) (affirming dismissal for failure to state claim because, even if all of taxpayer’s allegations were assumed to be true, petition merely contained conclusory assertions attacking constitutionality of Internal Revenue Code and its applicability to taxpayer, all of which had been rejected).

*61 Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. We also deny Kozikowski’s pending motions.

1

. The Honorable Peter J. Panuthos, United States Tax Court Judge.

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

PER CURIAM.

Justyn Kozikowski appeals the tax court’s 1 dismissal of his action challenging the result of a collection due process hearing relating to tax deficiencies. Upon de novo review, we agree with the tax court that Kozikowski failed to state a plausible or cognizable claim for relief. See Wilcox v. Comm’r of Internal Revenue, 848 F.2d 1007, 1008 (9th Cir.1988) (de novo standard of review); Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, — U.S. -, -, 127 S.Ct. 1955, 1974, 167 L.Ed.2d 929 (2007) (complaint must plead enough facts to state claim for relief that is plausible); Yuen v. Comm’r of Internal Revenue, 92 T.C.M. (CCH) 1, 3 (2006) (argument is frivolous where it is “contrary to established law and unsupported by a reasoned, colorable argument for change in the law”); May v. Comm’r of Internal Revenue, 752 F.2d 1301, 1303-04 & n. 3 (8th Cir.1985) (affirming dismissal for failure to state claim because, even if all of taxpayer’s allegations were assumed to be true, petition merely contained conclusory assertions attacking constitutionality of Internal Revenue Code and its applicability to taxpayer, all of which had been rejected).

*61 Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. We also deny Kozikowski’s pending motions.

1

. The Honorable Peter J. Panuthos, United States Tax Court Judge.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

258 F. App'x 60, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/justyn-kozikowski-v-commissioner-of-irs-ca8-2007.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack