Source: http://usa-the-republic.com/revenue/court%20cases/schiff.htm
Timestamp: 2019-04-25 14:36:31+00:00

Document:
Irwin A. Schiff, New York City, pro se.
Washington, D.C., on the brief), for appellee U.S.
Before FEINBERG, TIMBERS and MINER, Circuit Judges.
deficiencies owed for the years 1976 through 1978 and penalties imposed.
seeks costs and damages for a frivolous appeal.
necessary to an understanding of the issues raised on appeal.
Schiff filed no tax returns at all for the years 1977 and 1978.
AMENDMENTS OF THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION."
dollars, on the ground that Federal Reserve Notes are not 'dollars'...."
of $41,837.35 for 1976, $39,760.99 for 1977, and $110,247.89 for 1978.
make payment within ten days.
book he wrote entitled "How Anyone Can Stop Paying Income Taxes."
v. Simon & Schuster, Inc., 780 F.2d 210 (2 Cir.1985).
court granted the government's cross-motion for summary judgment.
motions for reconsideration.  Both were denied.
We review the district court's grant of summary judgment de novo.
favorable to Schiff. E.g., EAD Metallurgical, supra, 905 F.2d at 10.
appeal.  We hold that all of his claims are completely lacking in merit.
Cir.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1005 (1985).
that the assessments amounted to a taking of property without due process.
with an opportunity to be heard and to contest the IRS' calculations.
Schiff chose not to avail himself of that opportunity.
Inv., Inc. v. United States, 881 F.2d 340, 343-44 (6 Cir.1989).
taxes owed for the year 1976 was barred by the statute of limitations.
paying taxes."  Douge v. Commissioner, 899 F.2d 164, 168 (2 Cir.1990).
for the years 1976 through 1978 was a fraudulent attempt to evade taxes.
v. Schiff, supra, 647 F.2d 163, and the Supreme Court denied certiorari.
his failure to file returns for the years 1976 through 1978.
out of judges before whom their cases could be heard.
regardless of and oblivious to the interpretations of the judiciary."
United States v. Schiff, supra, 612 F.2d at 75.
taxes is legally required."  Id. (citations omitted).
Debenture Holders' Comm. v. DASA Corp., 605 F.2d 35, 40 n. 5 (2 Cir.1979).
We hold that " 'the situation here is one of those "highly unusual"
rehearing en banc, or petition for certiorari--in this case.
law.  In re Hartford Textile Corp., supra, 659 F.2d at 305-06.
of payment of the above sanction.
Affirmed with double costs and $5,000 damages against Schiff.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 

v. 
 v. 
 v.