Filed: Jun. 10, 2013
Latest Update: Jun. 10, 2013
Summary: ORDER SUSAN C. BUCKLEW, District Judge. This cause comes before the Court on Defendant United States of America's first motion to dismiss and second motion to dismiss. [Docs. 10, 17]. Both motions are opposed by Plaintiffs Jack and Shirley Bialik, Celeste E. Christman, Adam D. Ciccarello, Dorothy R. Fernandez, Kacey L. Gumina, William Howard, Leah S. and Robert C. Jones, Mary E. Kohler, Lindsey A. and Christopher J. Scanlon, and Andrew and Jared V. Shanks, Teresa D. and Aaron C. Smith, Marica
Summary: ORDER SUSAN C. BUCKLEW, District Judge. This cause comes before the Court on Defendant United States of America's first motion to dismiss and second motion to dismiss. [Docs. 10, 17]. Both motions are opposed by Plaintiffs Jack and Shirley Bialik, Celeste E. Christman, Adam D. Ciccarello, Dorothy R. Fernandez, Kacey L. Gumina, William Howard, Leah S. and Robert C. Jones, Mary E. Kohler, Lindsey A. and Christopher J. Scanlon, and Andrew and Jared V. Shanks, Teresa D. and Aaron C. Smith, Maricar..
More
ORDER
SUSAN C. BUCKLEW, District Judge.
This cause comes before the Court on Defendant United States of America's first motion to dismiss and second motion to dismiss. [Docs. 10, 17]. Both motions are opposed by Plaintiffs Jack and Shirley Bialik, Celeste E. Christman, Adam D. Ciccarello, Dorothy R. Fernandez, Kacey L. Gumina, William Howard, Leah S. and Robert C. Jones, Mary E. Kohler, Lindsey A. and Christopher J. Scanlon, and Andrew and Jared V. Shanks, Teresa D. and Aaron C. Smith, Maricarmen and Timothy G. Staggs, and Steward A. Stevens. [Docs. 12, 19].
On November 6, 2012, the nineteen named Plaintiffs filed a one-count amended complaint against the United States. [Doc. 6]. Plaintiffs allege they are entitled to, but have not received, their respective federal income tax refunds for the year 2011. They request the Court order the Internal Revenue Service ("IRS") to "immediately pay their tax refunds" pursuant to 26 U.S.C. § 7422, which governs civil actions for tax refunds. [Doc. 6 at 9].
On December 19, 2012, the United States filed its first motion to dismiss the claims of six Plaintiffs—who received their respective refunds, plus accrued interest, during the pendency of this litigation—as moot. [Doc. 10, Exs. 1-2]. Subsequently, the remaining thirteen Plaintiffs also received their refunds, plus accrued interest. [Doc. 17, Ex. 1]. On May 14, 2013, the United States filed a second motion to dismiss the remaining Plaintiffs' claims, and thus this case, as moot. [Doc. 17].
The Court lacks jurisdiction over a moot issue—i.e., an issue that "no longer presents a live controversy with respect to which the court can give meaningful relief." Christian Coalition of Fla., Inc. v. U.S., 662 F.3d 1182, 1189 (11th Cir. 2011). Plaintiffs confirm that all Plaintiffs have received their refunds. [Doc. 12 at 5; Doc. 19 at 4]. These refunds, although received after litigation began, render this refund suit moot. See Christian Coalition, 662 F.3d at 1190-92 (affirming finding that a tax refund suit becomes moot once the IRS granted a full refund to plaintiff). Thus, the Court finds that this case is moot and must be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Defendant's First Motion to Dismiss, [Doc. 10], and Second Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED. Plaintiffs' claims are dismissed and the Clerk is directed to close this case.
DONE AND ORDERED.
