Rudd v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue Service

First Circuit

Rudd v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue Service

91 F. App'x 699

CourtCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit

DecidedFebruary 24, 2004

Docket03-1688

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 91 F. App'x 699 (Rudd v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue Service) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the First Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Rudd v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue Service, 91 F. App'x 699 (1st Cir. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Patrick E. Rudd has appealed an order of the United States Tax Court that dismissed his petition, purportedly filed pursuant to 26 U.S.C. § 6330(d), for lack of jurisdiction. We review, de novo, legal interpretations of the Tax Court, such as this jurisdictional determination. See Capital Video Corp. v. Comm’r, 311 F.3d 458, 463 (1st Cir.2002). We affirm.

We conclude that the Tax Court correctly ruled that its jurisdiction under § 6330(d) depends upon the issuance of a valid notice of determination by the IRS’s *700 Office of Appeals and the filing of a timely petition for review. This jurisdictional ruling is in accord with the statutory language of § 6330(d) and is consistent with prior tax court rulings and the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure. See, e.g., Moorhous v. Comm’r, 116 T.C. 263, 269, 2001 WL 406389 (2001); Rule 330(b). Rudd makes no cogent opposing argument. Because the respondent Commissioner has not issued any notice of determination with respect to Rudd’s tax liability for 1989, the Tax Court correctly dismissed Rudd’s petition for lack of jurisdiction.

The order of dismissal is affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Patrick E. Rudd has appealed an order of the United States Tax Court that dismissed his petition, purportedly filed pursuant to 26 U.S.C. § 6330(d), for lack of jurisdiction. We review, de novo, legal interpretations of the Tax Court, such as this jurisdictional determination. See Capital Video Corp. v. Comm’r, 311 F.3d 458, 463 (1st Cir.2002). We affirm.

We conclude that the Tax Court correctly ruled that its jurisdiction under § 6330(d) depends upon the issuance of a valid notice of determination by the IRS’s *700 Office of Appeals and the filing of a timely petition for review. This jurisdictional ruling is in accord with the statutory language of § 6330(d) and is consistent with prior tax court rulings and the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure. See, e.g., Moorhous v. Comm’r, 116 T.C. 263, 269, 2001 WL 406389 (2001); Rule 330(b). Rudd makes no cogent opposing argument. Because the respondent Commissioner has not issued any notice of determination with respect to Rudd’s tax liability for 1989, the Tax Court correctly dismissed Rudd’s petition for lack of jurisdiction.

The order of dismissal is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

91 F. App'x 699, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rudd-v-commissioner-of-internal-revenue-service-ca1-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack