United States v. Nora Brayshaw
This text of United States v. Nora Brayshaw (United States v. Nora Brayshaw) 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
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUN 20 2018 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 17-16327
Petitioner-Appellee, D.C. No. 2:14-mc-00088-MCE- KJN v.
NORA BRAYSHAW, MEMORANDUM*
Respondent-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California Morrison C. England, Jr., District Judge, Presiding
Submitted June 12, 2018**
Before: RAWLINSON, CLIFTON, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.
Taxpayer Nora Brayshaw appeals from a clerk order entered in the district
court following an order to show cause hearing arising from the district court’s
orders enforcing an Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) summons to produce
documents and records related to her and her husband’s tax liability for 2002 to
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 2012. This court has an obligation to review whether appellate jurisdiction exists
for this appeal. Breed v. Hughes Aircraft Co., 253 F.3d 1173, 1177 (9th
Cir. 2001). We dismiss for lack of appellate jurisdiction.
We do not have jurisdiction to hear this appeal because the district court did
not enter, either during or after the order to show cause hearing, an order holding
Brayshaw in contempt or an order modifying its prior, final enforcement order.
See 28 U.S.C. § 1291; Couch v. Telescope Inc., 611 F.3d 629, 632 (9th Cir. 2010)
(“[P]arties may appeal only from orders which end the litigation on the merits and
leave nothing for the court to do but execute the judgment.” (citation, alterations,
and internal quotation marks omitted)).
DISMISSED.
2 17-16327
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
United States v. Nora Brayshaw, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-nora-brayshaw-ca9-2018.