Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. Taylor, 00-2421 (2001)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 00-2421 Visitors: 1
Filed: Mar. 27, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-2421 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus HUGH L. TAYLOR; BETTY B. TAYLOR, Defendants - Appellants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. Margaret B. Seymour, District Judge. (CA-99-947-6) Submitted: March 22, 2001 Decided: March 27, 2001 Before WILKINS, LUTTIG, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Hugh L. Taylor,
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-2421 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus HUGH L. TAYLOR; BETTY B. TAYLOR, Defendants - Appellants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. Margaret B. Seymour, District Judge. (CA-99-947-6) Submitted: March 22, 2001 Decided: March 27, 2001 Before WILKINS, LUTTIG, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Hugh L. Taylor, Betty B. Taylor, Appellants Pro Se. David I. Pincus, Carol Ann Barthel, Brian P. Kaufman, UNITED STATES DE- PARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C.; James D. McCoy, III, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Hugh L. Taylor and Betty B. Taylor appeal the district court’s orders granting summary judgment to the United States on its action seeking collection of the Taylors’ income tax liability. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Taylor, No. CA-99-947-6 (D.S.C. filed Sept. 28, 2000; entered Sept. 29, 2000).* We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequate- ly presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED * The United States has filed a motion for leave to seek a correction of the judgment in the district court pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(a). We hereby grant the motion. 2
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