Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Yue v. Commissioner, IRS, 05-1578 (2005)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 05-1578 Visitors: 23
Filed: Oct. 26, 2005
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-1578 DAVID D. YUE; TIENJEN YUE, Petitioners - Appellants, versus COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States Tax Court. (Tax Ct. No. 87-24414) Submitted: October 20, 2005 Decided: October 26, 2005 Before NIEMEYER and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. David D. and Tienjen Yue, Appellants Pro Se. Eileen J. O’Connor
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-1578 DAVID D. YUE; TIENJEN YUE, Petitioners - Appellants, versus COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States Tax Court. (Tax Ct. No. 87-24414) Submitted: October 20, 2005 Decided: October 26, 2005 Before NIEMEYER and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. David D. and Tienjen Yue, Appellants Pro Se. Eileen J. O’Connor, Assistant Attorney General, John A. Nolet, Andrea R. Tebbets, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: David and Teinjen Yue appeal from the tax court’s order denying their motion for leave to file a motion to vacate the tax court’s June 1993 order dismissing their petition for redetermination for failure to prosecute. Our review of the record and the tax court’s orders discloses no abuse of discretion and no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny the Yues’ motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss the appeal for the reasons stated by the tax court. Yue v. Comm’r, No. 87-24414 (U.S. Tax Ct. Mar. 31, 2005). 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. DISMISSED - 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