Rodrigues v. Commissioner

1982 T.C. Memo. 324, 44 T.C.M. 90, 1982 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 424
CourtUnited States Tax Court
DecidedJune 9, 1982
DocketDocket No. 2001-76.
StatusUnpublished

This text of 1982 T.C. Memo. 324 (Rodrigues v. Commissioner) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Tax Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Rodrigues v. Commissioner, 1982 T.C. Memo. 324, 44 T.C.M. 90, 1982 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 424 (tax 1982).

Opinion

JESS A. RODRIGUES and JERALYN RODRIGUES, Petitioners v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
Rodrigues v. Commissioner
Docket No. 2001-76.
United States Tax Court
T.C. Memo 1982-324; 1982 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 424; 44 T.C.M. (CCH) 90; T.C.M. (RIA) 82324;
June 9, 1982.
*424 Andrew L. Faber, for the petitioners.
Eugene H. Ciranni, for the respondent.

FAY

MEMORANDUM OPINION

FAY, Judge: This case is presently before the Court on petitioners' Motion to Tax Costs on Appeal. This case arises out of petitioners' appeal of a decision entered on December 4, 1979, wherein, pursuant to the opinion of this Court filed on July 25, 1979, sub nom. Cristina v. Commissioner,T.C. Memo. 1979-280, we determined a deficiency of $ 13,091 in petitioners' Federal income tax for 1971. Having found sufficient evidence of this Court's determination that a net operating loss occurred in 1974, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals remanded to this Court for either a Rule 155, Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure, computation or a reopening of the record for the taking of further testimony on the amount of 1974 net operating loss carryback applicable to the 1971 tax year. Pursuant to the mandate of the Court of Appeals and agreement of the parties, this Court entered a decision on April 20, 1982, that no deficiency in income tax was due from petitioners for the taxable year 1971.

By filing their motion herein, petitioners seek*425 an award of $ 311.75 from this Court for the cost of securing a letter of credit to stay collection of the tax as originally determined by this Court and an award of $ 208.65 for the reporter's fee for the trial transcript. The issue is whether this Court has authority to award such costs.

Petitioners' argument is based on rule 39, Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure. 1Rule 39(a) provides the general rule that a successful appellant is entitled to costs unless otherwise ordered. Certain costs are taxable in the Appellate Court, rule 39(c), and certain other costs are taxable in the District Court after receipt of the mandate from the Appellate Court, rule 39(e). Specifically, petitioners contend rule 39(e), which is made applicable to the Tax Court, 2 entitles them to an award for the cost of the letter of credit, which is in the nature of a bond to preserve rights pending appeal, and for the cost of the trial transcript. Respondent contends that before rule 39 can be applied to award costs against the government, there must be independent statutory authority allowing such costs, and no such authority exists herein. We find for respondent. *426

*427 Contrary to petitioners' statement of the law, it is not well-settled that this Court has authority to award costs on appeal. 3 In fact, this Court has no authority to award costs. McQuiston v. Commissioner, 78 T.C.     (May 13, 1982). 4 Accordingly, petitioners are not allowed an award for the claimed costs, 5 and

*428 An appropriate order will be entered.


Footnotes

  • 1. All rule references are to the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure. Rule 39 provides in pertinent part:

    (a) To Whom Allowed. Except as otherwise provided by law, * * * if a judgment is reversed, costs shall be taxed against the appellee unless otherwise ordered * * *

    (b) Costs for and Against the United States. In cases involving the United States or an agency or officer thereof, if an award of costs against the United States is authorized by law, costs shall be awarded in accordance with the provisions of subdivision (a); otherwise, costs shall not be awarded for or against the United States.

    (c) Costs of Briefs, Appendices, and Copies of Records. Unless otherwise provided by local rule, the cost of printing, or otherwise producing necessary copies of briefs, appendices, and copies of records authorized by Rule 30(f) shall be taxable in the court of appeals * * *

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

Related

Toner v. Commissioner
76 T.C. 217 (U.S. Tax Court, 1981)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1982 T.C. Memo. 324, 44 T.C.M. 90, 1982 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 424, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rodrigues-v-commissioner-tax-1982.