Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

79-6035 (1979)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit Number: 79-6035 Visitors: 4
Filed: Oct. 26, 1979
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 610 F.2d 89 79-2 USTC P 9714 UNITED STATES of America and Barbara A. Kilty, Richard Gutierrez, Special Agents, Internal Revenue Service, Petitioners-Appellees, v. DEAK-PERERA INTERNATIONAL BANKING CORPORATION, Respondent, and Charles V. Stephenson, Intervenor-Appellant. No. 79-6035. United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit. Oct. 26, 1979. Richard Blumenthal, U. S. Atty., New Haven, Conn., George J. Kelly, Jr., Asst. U. S. Atty., Hartford, Conn., Dept. of Justice, Tax Division, M. Carr Ferg
More

610 F.2d 89

79-2 USTC P 9714

UNITED STATES of America and Barbara A. Kilty, Richard
Gutierrez, Special Agents, Internal Revenue
Service, Petitioners-Appellees,
v.
DEAK-PERERA INTERNATIONAL BANKING CORPORATION, Respondent,
and
Charles V. Stephenson, Intervenor-Appellant.

No. 79-6035.

United States Court of Appeals,

Second Circuit.
Oct. 26, 1979.

Richard Blumenthal, U. S. Atty., New Haven, Conn., George J. Kelly, Jr., Asst. U. S. Atty., Hartford, Conn., Dept. of Justice, Tax Division, M. Carr Ferguson, Gilbert E. Andrews, Washington, D. C., for appellee.

Charles V. Stephenson, pro se.

Before MULLIGAN, OAKES and NEWMAN, Circuit Judges.

1

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut.

2

The district court enforced two Internal Revenue summonses issued pursuant to I.R.C. § 7602, directing Deak-Perera, a financial institution, to forward documents in its possession relating to appellant Stephenson's financial status during the years 1975-1977. The documents were necessary to determine Stephenson's income tax liability in furtherance of an I.R.A. joint civil-criminal investigation. The day after the district court's order, Deak-Perera complied fully with the summons. Since this was the only relief requested, there is no longer any live controversy between the parties. We therefore dismiss the appeal as moot. Barney v. United States, 568 F.2d 116, 117 (8th Cir. 1978); Kurshan v. Riley, 484 F.2d 952, 952-53 (4th Cir. 1973).

3

It is so ordered.

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