United States v. O'Shea

Fourth Circuit

United States v. O'Shea

610 F. App'x 285

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedJuly 27, 2015

DocketNo. 15-1245

StatusPublished

This text of 610 F. App'x 285 (United States v. O'Shea) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

United States v. O'Shea, 610 F. App'x 285 (4th Cir. 2015).

Pincite

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Gerard and Kathnell O’Shea and All About Beauty Trust appeal from the district court’s orders reducing to judgment the Commissioner of Internal Revenue’s tax assessments against each of them for unpaid tax liabilities for the 2002, 2003, and 2004 tax years. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. O’Shea, No. 5:12-cv-04075, 2015 WL 738135 (S.D.W.Va. Feb. 20, 24, & 27, 2015). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED.

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

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Gerard and Kathnell O’Shea and All About Beauty Trust appeal from the district court’s orders reducing to judgment the Commissioner of Internal Revenue’s tax assessments against each of them for unpaid tax liabilities for the 2002, 2003, and 2004 tax years. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. O’Shea, No. 5:12-cv-04075, 2015 WL 738135 (S.D.W.Va. Feb. 20, 24, & 27, 2015). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

610 F. App'x 285, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-oshea-ca4-2015.