Cases

CRONE, Judge. Case Summary Beth A. Ahls (“Wife”) appeals a property distribution order issued in conjunction with the dissolution of her marriage to Carleton E. Ahls (“Husband”). She asserts that the trial court clearly erred in dividing Husband’s three retirement accounts; .refusing her request for survivor benefits associated with those accounts; and i

HANSON, Senior District Judge. This is a civil action for damages brought against the United States and the Internal Revenue Service for the alleged disclosure of certain bank records of John D. Askew to the government of Venezuela in violation of the Privacy Act. 5 U.S.C. § 552a. Askew appeals the judgment of the district court dismissing his complaint after a bench trial was h

KEITH, Circuit Judge. This is an appeal from a judgment of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, distributing an inter-pleaded fund, less certain expenses, to the United States. For reasons stated below, we reverse the decision of the district court and remand with instructions to dismiss for lack of ju

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA No. 16-2188 Filed September 13, 2017 IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF MINDY SUE WASHBURN AND JAMIE ALLEN CARLETON WASHBURN Upon the Petition of MINDY SUE WASHBURN, Petitioner-Appellee, And Concerning JAMIE ALLEN CARLETON WASHBURN, Respondent-Appellant. ________________________________________________________________ Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County,

PER CURIAM. The United States and three employees of the Internal Revenue Service brought this action for declaratory and injunctive relief against the defendant Douglas M. Hart. Booth is District Director of the Internal Revenue Service for the North Dakota District, Roller is a group manager, and Shandony is an examination and revenue agent. Roller assigned Shandony to audit the

PER CURIAM. After examining the briefs and the appellate record, this three-judge panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not be of material assistance in the determination of this appeal. See Fed.R. App.P. 34(a); Tenth Cir.R. 10(e). The cause is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. Finer appeals fro

OPINION Dawson, Judge: This case was assigned to Special Trial Judge Carleton D. Powell pursuant to the provisions of section 7443A(b)(5) and Rules 180, 181, and 183.1 The Court agrees with and adopts the opinion of the Special Trial Judge, which is set forth below. OPINION OF THE SPECIAL TRIAL JUDGE

OPINION Dawson, Judge: This case was assigned to Special Trial Judge Carleton D. Powell pursuant to section 7443A(b)(3) and Rules 180, 181, and 182.1 The Court agrees with and adopts the opinion of the Special Trial Judge, which is set forth below. OPINION OF THE SPECIAL TRIAL JUDGE

PER CURIAM. Daniel Hudson filed a 1982 tax return containing only his name, address, social security number, filing status, and number of exemptions. He responded to all other questions on the return with “Object,” “None,” or “0,” stating that answers to these questions would “have a tendency to incriminate me of any ambiguous and f

COLEMAN, Circuit Judge: Appellants-taxpayers appeal the Tax Court’s determination that they improperly allocated the entire cost basis of a tract of land to a portion of the tract which they sold. We affirm. The facts are stipulated. On February 3, 1967, appellant obtained an option to purchase 3.808 acre

OPINION Dawson, Judge: This case was assigned to Special Trial Judge Carleton D. Powell pursuant to the provisions of section TJJSACbXS)1 and Rules 180, 181, and 183. The Court agrees with and adopts the opinion of the Special Trial Judge set forth below. OPINION OF THE SPECIAL TRIAL JUDGE

HOLLOWAY, Circuit Judge. Taxpayers Fred and Angela Marvel appeal from a judgment of the district court finding taxpayers liable for unpaid Federal Insurance Contribution Act (FICA), Federal Unemployment Tax Act (FUTA), and federal withholding taxes. Taxpayers contend that the district court erred (1) in referring their case to a federal magistrate for trial without statutory o

TRASK, Circuit Judge: This is an appeal from a decision of the Tax Court that was adverse to the *383 executor of the Estate of Marcellus L. Joslyn. Jurisdiction below was based upon section 6214 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954;

Pfeifer, J. {¶ 1} This is an appeal as of right by defendant-appellant, Wayne Powell. A jury convicted Powell of the aggravated murder of Rosemary and Mary McCollum, four-year-old Jamal McCollum-Myers, and three-year-old Sanaa’ Thomas, and of aggravated arson. The jury recommended the sentence of death for the aggravated murder of t

Dawson, Judge: This case was assigned to Special Trial Judge Carleton D. Powell pursuant to the provisions of section 7443A(b)(3) and Rules 180, 181, and 182.1 The Court agrees with and adopts the opinion of the Special Trial Judge, which is set forth below. OPINION OF THE SPECIAL TRIAL JUDGE Powell, Special Tri

OPINION Dawson, Judge: This case was assigned to Special Trial Judge Carleton D. Powell pursuant to Rules 180, 181, and 183. All Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure. The Court agrees with and adopts the opinion of the Special Trial Judge, which is set forth below. OPINION OF THE SPECIAL TRIAL JUDGE

OPINION Dawson, Judge: This case was assigned to Special Trial Judge Carleton D. Powell pursuant to Rules 180, 181, and 183. All Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure. The Court agrees with and adopts the opinion of the Special Trial Judge, which is set forth below. OPINION OF THE SPECIAL TRIAL JUDGE

BOOCHEVER, Circuit Judge: Milo and Nance Boday, Ann Cleary, and Mark and Virginia Clements (taxpayers) appeal separately the district courts’ summary judgments in favor of the United States in their tax refund actions. They each contend that the district courts erred *1474in finding that: (1) the IRS properly assessed $500 frivolous return penalties against them; (

PER CURIAM. Taxpayers, Phillip and Susan Fry and eight entities,1 appeal from two orders of the district court granting the government’s petition for enforcement of two summonses issued to the respondent banking institutions by the Internal Revenue Service. After careful review of the entire file, counsel’s briefs and oral argument, we determine that the orders of the district court should be affir

648 F.2d 1122 61 A.L.R.Fed. 307, 81-1 USTC P 13,410 John B. FLEMING, Personal Representative of the Estate ofJohn J. Fleming, Deceased, Plaintiff-Appellant,v.UNITED STATES of America, Defendant-Appellee. No. 80-1588. United States Court of Appeals,Seventh Circuit. Argued Sept. 24, 1980.Decided May 18, 1981.