Court of Claims, 1982

Bartek v. United States

Court of Claims · Decided February 26, 1982

230 Ct. Cl. 728; 49 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 808; 1982 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 96; 1982 WL 25170

Counsel

Before Nichols, Kashiwa, and Smith, Judges.

Cases that cite this one

1 later published case cites this decision.

Johnson v. United States (United States Court of Federal Claims 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

per curiam:

Plaintiff, appearing pro se, disputes the Internal Revenue Service disallowance of a deduction for business use of the home on plaintiffs 1978 personal income tax return and demands judgment in the amount of $557.

Plaintiff's petition is deficient in two respects. First, it fails to allege overpayment of the taxes in dispute. Our *729jurisdiction is limited to cases in which the disputed taxes have been paid. Flora v. United States, 362 U.S. 145 (1960). The second deficiency, which goes to the heart of plaintiffs case, is that he does not allege that he has filed a claim for refund with the Service and that the claim has been denied or the statutory waiting period has expired. We have no jurisdiction over a tax refund case unless these conditions are met. I.R.C. §7422(a).

it is therefore ordered that the petition is dismissed for failure to allege facts upon which this court might base its jurisdiction, in violation of Rule 35.

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