Harold Stanley v. CIR

Filing

PER CURIAM OPINION FILED - THE COURT: Roger L. Wollman, Michael J. Melloy and Bobby E. Shepherd The judgment of the Originating Court is AFFIRMED in accordance with the opinion.; Denying [3948710-2] motion for an order to cease and desist collection activities filed by Mr. Harold R Stanley. [3963495] [12-1914]

United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 12-1914
___________________________
Harold Ray Stanley
lllllllllllllllllllllAppellant
v.
Commissioner of Internal Revenue
lllllllllllllllllllllAppellee
____________
Appeal from the United States Tax Court
____________
Submitted: October 12, 2012
Filed: October 15, 2012
[Unpublished]
____________
Before WOLLMAN, MELLOY, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Harold Stanley appeals the tax court’s1 adverse grant of summary judgment in
his tax action. After careful consideration, see Nestle Purina Petcare Co. v. Comm’r,
594 F.3d 968, 970 (8th Cir.) (de novo review), cert. denied 131 S. Ct. 86 (2010), we
conclude summary judgment was proper, see Bell v. Comm’r, 126 T.C. 356, 358
1

The Honorable Elizabeth Crewson Paris, United States Tax Court Judge.

Appellate Case: 12-1914

Page: 1

Date Filed: 10/15/2012 Entry ID: 3963495

(2006) (26 U.S.C. § 6330 allows challenges to existence or amount of underlying
liability if petitioner did not receive notice of deficiency or otherwise have opportunity
to dispute liability; this statutory preclusion is triggered by opportunity to contest
underlying liability, even if opportunity is not pursued). We therefore affirm the
ruling of the tax court. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. We deny appellant’s pending motion.
______________________________

-2-

Appellate Case: 12-1914

Page: 2

Date Filed: 10/15/2012 Entry ID: 3963495