U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 2005

Taylor v. Commissioner

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Decided May 16, 2005 · Canby, Pregerson, Thomas

130 F. App'x 934

Counsel

Sue Taylor, Gilbert, AZ, pro se., Frank P. Cihlar, Attorney, Eileen J. O’Connor, Esq., Mary E. RoccapriorePelletier, Esq., Mary R. Pelletier, Esq., DOJ-U.S. Department of Justice Tax Division, Washington, DC, for Respondent-Appellee.

Cases that cite this one

16 later published cases cite this decision.

Spinner v. Comm'r (United States Tax Court 2017)
David L. Jones v. Commissioner (United States Tax Court 2017)
Jones v. Comm'r (United States Tax Court 2017)
Baptiste v. Comm'r (United States Tax Court 2016)
Norman v. Comm'r (United States Tax Court 2016)
Carter v. Comm'r (United States Tax Court 2016)
Natkunanathan v. Commissioner (United States Tax Court 2015)
Frank Gibson v. Commissioner (United States Tax Court 2014)
Caudle v. Comm'r (United States Tax Court 2014)
Howell v. Comm'r (United States Tax Court 2014)
Gibson v. Comm'r (United States Tax Court 2014)
Gentile v. Comm'r (United States Tax Court 2013)
Jackson v. Comm'r (United States Tax Court 2012)
Taylor v. Comm'r (United States Tax Court 2008)
Louis A. and Christine Cox v. Commissioner (United States Tax Court 2006)
Dominic Calafati v. Commissioner (United States Tax Court 2006)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM **

Sue Taylor appeals pro se the Tax Court’s summary judgment in favor of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue (“Commissioner”) in her action contesting deficiencies for tax year 1997. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 26 U.S.C. § 7482. We review de novo, see Talley Indus. Inc. v. Comm’r, 116 F.3d 382, 385 (9th Cir. 1997), and we affirm.

Taylor’s sole contention on appeal is that she is entitled to a second collection due process hearing so that she may record the hearing. Recording the collection due process hearing is permitted upon advance request, but Taylor made no such request, and then failed to appear for her hearing. See 26 U.S.C. § 7521(a)(1) (permitting recording upon advance request). We are not persuaded by Taylor’s contention that had she requested permission to record the hearing, her request would have been denied. Consequently, the Tax Court properly granted summary judgment for *935the Commissioner. See Bob Wondries Motors, Inc. v. Comm’r, 268 F.3d 1156, 1161 (9th Cir. 2001).

All pending motions are denied as moot.

AFFIRMED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.