No. 18-1270
Henry M. Jagos, et ux. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
Response Waived
Tags: administrative-law administrative-procedure circuit-court-split circuit-split civil-procedure due-process eighth-circuit judicial-review jurisdiction notice-of-deficiency sixth-circuit standing tax-appeals tax-court tax-court-jurisdiction tax-procedure
Key Terms:
AdministrativeLaw
AdministrativeLaw
Latest Conference:
2019-05-09
Question Presented (from Petition)
1. Did the Tax Court lack jurisdiction when it had no facially legitimate notice of deficiency?
2. Did the Sixth Circuit Court Of Appeals properly consider all of Petitioners arguments and the law?
3. Why did the Sixth Circuit Court Of Appeals come to a different ruling than the Eighth Circuit Court Of Appeals on the same issue?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Did the Tax Court lack jurisdiction when it had no facially legitimate notice of deficiency?
Docket Entries
2019-05-13
Petition DENIED.
2019-04-17
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/9/2019.
2019-04-08
Waiver of right of respondent Commissioner of Internal Revenue to respond filed.
2019-01-07
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due May 3, 2019)
Attorneys
Commissioner of Internal Revenue
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent
Henry Jagos, et al.
Henry M. Jagos — Petitioner