TAX COURT OPINION

Case: Lola M. Hussey
Docket Number: 1870-24L
Judge: Carluzzo
Opinion Type: bench
Filed: 11/26/2025
Pages: 4

LOLA M. HUSSEY, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent United States Tax Court Washington, DC 20217 Docket No. 1870-24L. ORDER Pursuant to Rule 152(b), Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure, it is ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall transmit herewith to petitioner and to respondent a copy of the pages of the transcript of the opinion in the above case before Special Trial Judge Carluzzo at Dallas, Texas, on September 10, 2025, containing his oral findings of fact and opinion rendered at the conclusion of the trial. In accordance with the oral findings of fact and opinion, a decision will be entered for respondent. (Signed) Lewis R. Carluzzo Special Trial Judge Served 11/26/25 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 3 Bench Opinion by Judge Lewis R. Carluzzo September 10, 2025 Lola M. Hussey v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue Docket No. 1870-24L THE COURT: The Court has decided to render oral findings of fact and opinion in this case, and the following represents the Court's oral findings of fact and opinion (bench opinion). Section references made in this bench opinion are to the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, in effect for the relevant period, and Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure. This bench opinion is made pursuant to the authority granted by section 7459(b) and Rule 152. Except as provided in Rule 152(c), this bench opinion shall not be cited as authority. By order served April 24, 2025, this section 6330(d) case was assigned to the undersigned. See section 7443A(b)(4) and (c). By order served May 7, 2025, Respondent's Motion for Summary Judgment filed December 5, 2024 was set for hearing on September 10th, 2025 in Dallas, Texas. That order further directed that the parties must be prepared to proceed to trial that day in the event that Respondent's motion was not dispositive. The case was called as scheduled. There was no appearance by or on behalf of Petitioner. Joseph L. 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 Damele and Chase Barnhill appeared on behalf of Respondent 4 and elected to proceed to trial. Consequently, Respondent's Summary Judgment motion is moot and will be denied on that ground by separate order. In a Notice of Determination (notice) dated December 28, 2023, Respondent determined that various collection actions are appropriate collection actions with respect to Petitioner's outstanding 2018 Federal income tax liability. That liability, including penalties and interest, was assessed in due course following the Notice of Deficiency procedures contemplated in section 6213 (underlying liability). Allegations made in the amended petition claim that the notice is, "arbitrary and erroneous" but Petitioner has offered no evidence in support of that allegation. See Rule 143(c). Furthermore, a fair reading of the amended petition shows that in this proceeding, Petitioner challenges only the existence and the amount of the underlying liability. It is questionable whether she is entitled to do so in this proceeding, but we see little benefit in wasting further time to consider the point. Respondent's evidence shows that in all respects, including the assessment of the underlying liability, Respondent has proceeded as required by the relevant statutory schemes and the lack of evidence to the contrary 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 eliminates any need for further consideration. 5 Although unnecessary, in closing, we think it appropriate to note that Petitioner's reliance on Portillo v. Commissioner, 932 F.2d 1128 (Fifth Cir. 1991), in support of her challenges made in the amended petition is misplaced. Unlike the taxpayer in that case, Petitioner has not denied receipt of the income that resulted in the assessment of the underlying liability. See Geiger v. Commissioner, TC Memo 1999-59. It follows and we hold that Respondent may proceed with collection as determined in the notice. To give effect to the foregoing, decision will be entered for 13 Respondent. 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 This concludes the bench opinion in this case. (Whereupon, at 11:21 a.m., the above-entitled matter was concluded.)