Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-02411/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-02411-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 871
Nature of Suit: IRS 3rd Party Suits 26 USC 7609 (U.S. plaintiff)
Cause of Action: 28:1346 Recovery of IRS Tax

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LES FIELDS/C.C.H.I. INSURANCE

SERVICES,

Plaintiff,

 v.

 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Defendant. /

No. C 15-02411 WHA

ORDER STAYING CASE

In this action for a tax refund, an order denied plaintiff’s motion of joinder, leave to

amend, and injunctive relief (Dkt. No. 34). Both sides were further ordered to show cause why

a stay should not issue pending the outcome of the trial in an earlier-filed Tax Court case, which

involves the same plaintiff and the common legal question of whether plaintiff’s principal,

Leslie Fields, was properly classified as an independent contractor rather than as an employee

for tax purposes.

The United States stated that it believes a stay is warranted (Dkt. No. 36). Plaintiff

admits that the independent contractor/employee question, common to this case and the case

before the Tax Court, is the “crux” of both actions. It contends a stay is not warranted because

both this Court and the Tax Court have proper jurisdiction over the issue (Dkt. No. 37). 

Plaintiff’s argument is unpersuasive. (If anything, it indicates that a stay is warranted.) 

Case 3:15-cv-02411-JCS Document 38 Filed 01/25/16 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

This order hereby STAYS this case, pending the resolution of Les Fields/C.C.H.I.

Insurance Services v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, No. 31090-14 (T.C.). The parties

shall submit a joint status report by the earlier of: (1) FIVE CALENDAR DAYS following a

dispositive ruling in the Tax Court, or (2) APRIL 25, 2016.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 25, 2016. WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:15-cv-02411-JCS Document 38 Filed 01/25/16 Page 2 of 2