Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

V. John G. Whittaker Cecilia B. Whittaker, Pe Titioners-Appellants, Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 92-2322 (1993)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 92-2322 Visitors: 23
Filed: Jun. 08, 1993
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 993 F.2d 1541 NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. v. JOHN G. WHITTAKER; Cecilia B. Whittaker, Pe titioners-Appellants, COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent-Appellee. No. 92-2322. United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit. Submitted: May 11, 1993 Decided: June 8, 199
More

993 F.2d 1541

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
v.
JOHN G. WHITTAKER; Cecilia B. Whittaker, Pe titioners-Appellants,
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 92-2322.

United States Court of Appeals,
Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: May 11, 1993
Decided: June 8, 1993

On Appeal from the United States Tax Court. (Tax Ct. )

John G. Whittaker, Cecilia B. Whittaker, Appellants Pro Se.

Gary R. Allen, Paula Keyser Speck, United States Department of Justice, Washington, D.C., for Appellee.

USTC

AFFITMED.

Before MURNAGHAN and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

OPINION

1

John G. Whittaker and Cecilia B. Whittaker appeal from the Tax Court's decision finding a deficiency in income tax due and imposing additions to tax and increased interest. Our review of the record and the Tax Court's opinion discloses no error and that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the Tax Court. Whittaker v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, No. 86-15802 (U.S.T.C. Jan. 14, 1992). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the Court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer