TAX COURT OPINION

Case: Harry C. Baxter
Docket Number: 16996-07L
Judge: Colvin
Opinion Type: bench
Filed: 04/08/2008
Pages: 6

UNITED STATES TAX COURT Washington , D. C . 2021 7 HARRY C . BAXTER, Petitioner ) v . ) Docket No . 16996-07L COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE , Respondent . O R D E R 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 trial of the above case before Judge Thomas B . Wells at Columbia, South Carolina, on March 17, 2008, containing his oral findings of fact and opinion rendered at the conclusion of trial . In accordance with the oral findings of fact and opinion, an appropriate order of dismissal will be entered . Dated : Washington, D . C . April 8, 2008 (Signed) Thomas B. Wells Judge .SERVED APR 16 2008 2 1 Bench Opinion by Judge Thomas B . Wells 2 March 17, 200 8 3 Docket No . 16996-07L Baxter v . Commissione r 4 5 THE COURT : The Court has decided to render oral 6 findings of fact and opinion in this case and th e 7 following represents the Court's oral findings of fact and 8 opinion . The oral findings of fact and opinion shall not 9 be relied upon as precedent in any other case . 10 This is the case of Harry C . Baxter, Petitioner, 11 versus Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Respondent ; 12 Docket Number 16996-07L . 13 This bench opinion is made pursuant to the 14 authority granted by Section 7459(d) and Rule 152 . All 15 section references are to the Internal Revenue Code as in 16 effect for the year in issue, and all rule references are 17 to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure . 18 This case is before the Court on Respondent's 19 motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction . Respondent 20 contends that this Court lacks jurisdiction for the years 21 1993 through 1996 and 1999, on the grounds that th e 22 petition was not timely filed with this Court for reasons 23 hereinafter explained . 24 The notice of determination dated September 20, 25 2006, upon which the above-entitled case is based, was Heritage Reporting Corporatio n (202) 628-4888 3 1 sent to Petitioner's last-known address, the address shown 2 in the notice of determination, by certified mail, on 3 September 20, 2006 . A copy of the notice of determination 4 is not attached to the petition but is attached as Exhibit 5 A to Respondent's motion . 6 Petitioner timely filed an action in the United 7 States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia 8 on October 5, 2006 . A copy of the action is attached a s 9 Exhibit B to Respondent's motion . 10 The United States District Court for th e 11 Northern District of Georgia dismissed Petitioner's case 12 for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction on December 26, 13 2006 . A copy of the order is attached as Exhibit C to 14 Respondent's motion . 15 On January 3, 2007, Petitioner filed a motion 16 for reconsideration with the U .S . District Court for the 17 Northern District of Georgia . A copy of the motion for 18 reconsideration of the dismissal for lack of subject- 19 matter jurisdiction is attached as Exhibit D to 20 Respondent's motion . 21 On January 29, 2007, the U .S . District Court for 22 the Northern District of Georgia denied Petitioner' s 23 request for reconsideration and reiterated the Court had 24 no subject-matter jurisdiction in the case . A copy of the 25 order is attached as Exhibit E to Respondent's motion . Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 1 On February $', 2007, Petitioner appealed th e a 8 4 -3 2 District Court's order of January 29, 2007 . A copy of the 3 notice of appeal is attached as Exhibit F to Respondent's 4 motion . 5 On April 12, 2007, the District Court certified 6 to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals that Petitioner' s 7 appeal was frivolous and not brought in good faith . A 8 copy of the District Court order is attached as Exhibit G 9 to Respondent's motion . 10 On July 2, 2007, Petitioner's appeal in forma 11 pauperis was denied as being frivolous . A copy of the 12 order is attached as Exhibit H to Respondent's motion . 13 On July 24, 2007, Petitioner's appeal to the 14 11th Circuit Court of Appeals was dismissed for want of 15 prosecution for failing to pay the filing fee . A copy of 16 the order is attached as Exhibit I to Respondent's motion . 17 The date of the U .S . postmark stamped on th e 18 cover in which the petition was mailed to the Tax Court is 19 July 24, 2007, which is 307 days after the mailing of the 20 notice of determination . The petition was filed 210 days 21 after the District Court determined that it had no subject 22 matter jurisdiction and 176 days after the District Court 23 denied Petitioner's request for reconsideration . 24 Section 6330(d)(1) provides that, "If a court 25 determines that the appeal was to an incorrect court, -t-ke- a 18W' Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 5 1 person shall have 30 days after the court determination to 2 file such appeal with the correct court . " 3 In the instant case, the only determinatio n 4 regarding the lack of subject-matter jurisdiction was made 5 on December 26, 2006, by the District Court for th e 6 Northern District of Georgia . Petitioner had unti l 7 January 25, 2007, to file a petition with the Tax Court . 8 Instead he filed a frivolous appeal to the 11th Circuit 9 Court of Appeals . 10 The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals dismisse d 11 Petitioner's appeal, both for being frivolous and for his 12 failure to prosecute . That appeal also was to the wrong 13 court, but the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals made n o 14 determination that the appeal was to the incorrect court . 15 The dismissal by the 11th Circuit Court o f 16 Appeals was not a determination of subject-matte r 17 jurisdiction on the merits . Headley v . Commissioner , T .C . 18 Memo 2007-7 . The 30-day time period for filing with the 19 Tax Court ran from the date of the District Court' s 20 determination of lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, not 21 from the date the 11th Circuit dismissed the frivolou s 22 appeal . I . 23 As the petition was not filed with the Tax Court 24 within the time prescribed by 6213(a), 7502, o r 25 6330(d)(1), we will grant Respondent's motion to dismiss Heritage Reporting Corporatio n (202) 628-4888 6 1 for lack of jurisdiction . To reflect the foregoing, an 2 appropriate order of dismissal will be entered granting 3 Respondent ' s motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction . 4 The foregoing represents the Court's ora l 5 findings of fact and opinion in this case . 6 This concludes this case . Thank you . 7 (Whereupon , at 12 :20 p .m ., the bench opinion in 8 the above - entitled matter was concluded . ) 9 // 10 // 11 // 12 // 13 // 14 // 15 // 16 // 17 // 18 // 1 9 20 // 21 // 2 2 2 3 24 25 Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888