Leroy D. And Mildred F. Ates v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

Fifth Circuit

Leroy D. And Mildred F. Ates v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

672 F.2d 468, 1982 U.S. App. LEXIS 20413

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedApril 5, 1982

Docket81-4166

StatusPublished

This text of 672 F.2d 468 (Leroy D. And Mildred F. Ates v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Leroy D. And Mildred F. Ates v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 672 F.2d 468, 1982 U.S. App. LEXIS 20413 (5th Cir. 1982).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Appellants Leroy D. and Mildred F. Ates have filed a second motion for rehearing en banc and stay of the mandate which they have entitled, “Motion on Opinion or Suggestion for Rehearing En Banc and to Suspend Writ of Mandamus.”

Their main complaint is focused on the disposition of their appeal from the United States Tax Court by a Rule 21 affirmance. For an explanation of United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit Rule 21 see N. L. R. B. v. Amalgamated Clothing Workers of America AFL-CIO Local 900, 430 F.2d 966 (5th Cir. 1970). In Taylor v. McKeithen, 407 U.S. 191, 92 S.Ct. 1980, 32 L.Ed.2d 648, *469 the Supreme Court of the United States in both the majority and dissenting opinions has apparently agreed that the Courts of Appeal in disposing of their business may, where appropriate, decide cases without written opinion by a rule such as Rule 21 of this circuit.

A panel of this court having decided that Rule 21 was applicable has decided the appellants’ case without written opinion. 659 F.2d 1074, U.S.T.C. Appellants’ second motion for rehearing en banc and for stay of the mandate is therefore DENIED.

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

PER CURIAM:

Appellants Leroy D. and Mildred F. Ates have filed a second motion for rehearing en banc and stay of the mandate which they have entitled, “Motion on Opinion or Suggestion for Rehearing En Banc and to Suspend Writ of Mandamus.”

Their main complaint is focused on the disposition of their appeal from the United States Tax Court by a Rule 21 affirmance. For an explanation of United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit Rule 21 see N. L. R. B. v. Amalgamated Clothing Workers of America AFL-CIO Local 900, 430 F.2d 966 (5th Cir. 1970). In Taylor v. McKeithen, 407 U.S. 191, 92 S.Ct. 1980, 32 L.Ed.2d 648, *469 the Supreme Court of the United States in both the majority and dissenting opinions has apparently agreed that the Courts of Appeal in disposing of their business may, where appropriate, decide cases without written opinion by a rule such as Rule 21 of this circuit.

A panel of this court having decided that Rule 21 was applicable has decided the appellants’ case without written opinion. 659 F.2d 1074, U.S.T.C. Appellants’ second motion for rehearing en banc and for stay of the mandate is therefore DENIED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

672 F.2d 468, 1982 U.S. App. LEXIS 20413, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/leroy-d-and-mildred-f-ates-v-commissioner-of-internal-revenue-ca5-1982.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack