This document is a court opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit regarding Michael Scott's appeal of the district court's denial of his petition to quash IRS summonses and granting of the government's request to enforce certain summonses. The appeals court affirms the district court's ruling, agreeing with the government that Scott's claims of error lack merit and that the magistrate judge provided sound reasons for denying the petition to quash and granting the request for enforcement.
This document is a court opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit regarding Michael Scott's appeal of the district court's denial of his petition to quash IRS summonses and granting of the government's request to enforce certain summonses. The appeals court affirms the district court's ruling, agreeing with the government that Scott's claims of error lack merit and that the magistrate judge provided sound reasons for denying the petition to quash and granting the request for enforcement.
This document is a court opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit regarding Michael Scott's appeal of the district court's denial of his petition to quash IRS summonses and granting of the government's request to enforce certain summonses. The appeals court affirms the district court's ruling, agreeing with the government that Scott's claims of error lack merit and that the magistrate judge provided sound reasons for denying the petition to quash and granting the request for enforcement.
[NOT FOR PUBLICATION NOT TO BE CITED AS PRECEDENT]
United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit
No. 99-1400
MICHAEL A. SCOTT,
Petitioner, Appellant,
v.
INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY;
UNITED STATES,
Respondents, Appellees.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
[Hon. Patti B. Saris, U.S. District Judge]
Before
Torruella, Chief Judge,
Stahl and Lipez, Circuit Judges.
Michael Scott on brief pro se.
Loretta C. Argrett, Assistant Attorney General, Frank P. Cihlar, John A. Dudeck, Jr., Attorneys, Tax Division, Department of Justice, and Donald K. Stern, United States Attorney, on brief for appellees.
December 14, 1999
Per Curiam. Pro se taxpayer Michael Scott appeals
from the district court's decision denying his petition to quash certain Internal Revenue Service summonses and granting the government's request to enforce certain summonses.
After
careful review of the appellant's and government's briefs, we
conclude, for the reasons given by the government, that appellant's claims of error lack merit.
We also conclude,
essentially for the reasons given by the magistrate judge in
his November 13, 1998 order, which the district court adopted after de novo review as its final order on February 9, 1999, that the petition to quash was properly denied and the request for enforcement properly granted. Affirmed.
William E. McNair v. Roscoe Eggers, Commissioner of Internal Revenue, United States of America, Acting in His Official Capacity, 788 F.2d 1509, 11th Cir. (1986)
Stanley v. Tucker v. William R. Moller, Edmund T. Curran, Regnier, Moller & Taylor, A Partnership, John Does, A, B, C, and D, 445 F.2d 1400, 2d Cir. (1971)