Case Name: Stuart HIRSHFIELD and Susanne Hirshfield, PlaintiffsAppellees, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2003-08-05
Citations: 70 F. App'x 609
Docket Number: No. 02-6080
Parties: Stuart HIRSHFIELD and Susanne Hirshfield, PlaintiffsAppellees, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: PRESENT: OAKES, CALABRESI, and SACK, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 70
Pages: 609–609

Head Matter:
Stuart HIRSHFIELD and Susanne Hirshfield, PlaintiffsAppellees, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 02-6080.
United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
Aug. 5, 2003.
Sean H. Lane, Assistant United States Attorney (James B. Comey, United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, Gideon A. Schor, Assistant United States Attorney, of counsel), New York, N.Y., for Appellant.
Stuart A Smith, New York, N.Y., for Appellees.
PRESENT: OAKES, CALABRESI, and SACK, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
SUMMARY ORDER
The United States appeals from a partial judgment in favor of the plaintiffsappellees, Stuart and Susanne Hirshfield, granting summary judgment on their claim for reimbursement of penalties paid in response to an untimely notice of deficiency. Hirshfield v. United States, 177 F.Supp.2d 220, 221 (S.D.N.Y.2001); see also Hirshfield v. United States, No. 99 Civ. 1828, 2001 WL 579783, 2001 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6955 (S.D.N.Y. May 31, 2001). For the reasons stated in an opinion we issue today on substantially the same questions raised in this appeal, Carroll v. United States, 339 f.3D 61 (2d Cir.2003), we affirm the judgment of the district court.
For the foregoing reasons, the judgment of the District Court is hereby AFFIRMED.