Maxcrest Ltd. v. United States
This text of 703 F. App'x 536 (Maxcrest Ltd. v. United States) 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
Maxcrest Ltd. alleges that the government issued and reissued a summons in bad faith, because only on reissue was it given notice and opportunity to complain that the summons was issued in bad faith. Bad faith exists where a summons is issued without a legitimate or proper purpose, to abuse a court’s process, to harass a taxpayer, to improperly use the requested information, or otherwise to go fishing. United States v. Clarke, — U.S. —, 134 S.Ct. 2361, 2367, 189 L.Ed.2d 330 (2014); United States v. Powell, 379 U.S. 48, 57-58, 85 S.Ct. 248, 13 L.Ed.2d 112 (1964); United States v. Jose, 131 F.3d 1325, 1328 (9th Cir. 1997); Liberty Fin. Servs. v. United States, 778 F.2d 1390, 1392-93 (9th Cir. 1985). The government reissued the summons so that Maxcrest could have its opportunity to complain. Finally armed with that opportunity, Maxcrest now fails to allege even a single improper purpose behind either summons. The district court’s order is thus
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as 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
703 F. App'x 536, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/maxcrest-ltd-v-united-states-ca9-2017.