Document: 484 U.S. 3 108 S.Ct. 217 98 L.Ed.2d 2 COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUEv.Robert McCOY, Executor of the Estate Arthur H. McCoy, Deceased. No. 87-75. Decided Oct. 19, 1987. Rehearing Denied Dec. 7, See 982, 496. PER CURIAM. 1 In this case, we are asked to determine whether United States Court Appeals exceeded its jurisdictional authority when, after affirming a decision Tax Court, it granted taxpayer-estate's request forgive interest on determined deficiency in estate tax and also statutorily imposed late-payment penalty. We constrained hold that did exceed authority. * McCoy died testate April 23, 1980. His son, Robert respondent here, was appointed executor his will. At death, decedent owner an undivided family farm Clinton County, Ohio. The then fair market value $235,140. Under § 2032A Internal Revenue Code 1954, as amended, 26 U.S.C. (1982 ed. Supp. III), however, may elect special method for valuing certain real property federal purposes. This alternative usually is elected if produces lower valuation tax. time relevant estate, election available only land question "qualified property," see 2032A(b)(1), made "not later than prescribed by section 6075(a) filing [estate tax] return . (including extensions thereof). ." 2032A(d)(1) (1976 ed.). Since provided be filed within nine months decedent's since no extension obtained, required make any under not January 1981. Respondent, file until February 11. return, farm—which, conceded, would have been property"—was asserted. Commissioner Revenue, took position untimely 6075(a), therefore valued at date-of-death figure $235,140, rather special-use $103,304.70 claimed filed. produced Commissioner, using higher value, $22,159.72. 4 Respondent sought redetermination asserted Court. He contended making had extended retroactively amendments statute effected Economic Recovery Act 1981, Pub.L. 97-34, 421(k)(5), 95 Stat. 314 note following 2032A. 5 rejected respondent's contention sustained deficiency. 50 TCM 1194 (1985); ¶ 85,509 P-H Memo TC. affirmed. 809 F.2d 333 (CA6 1987). After Court's decision, appeal bond 7485, assessment collection were stayed. Despite pendency Sixth Circuit, assessed issued notice demand payment. When paid 10 days, addition accrued 6651(a)(3). Shortly opinion, but petition with asking court "forgive" case one first impression otherwise victim obscure after-the-fact statutory amendment. he litigated good faith validity election. 6 March 2, 1987, entered order granting relief requested petition. App. Pet. Cert. 1a. It noted "the penalties now tax," concluded should forgiven "in achieve just result." Ibid. seeks writ certiorari. II 7 7482(a), regional courts appeals jurisdiction review decisions same manner extent district civil actions tried without jury." Section 7482(c)(1) provides "such shall power affirm or, accordance law, modify or reverse Court." follows reviewing duty consider committed error. Plainly, lacks decide issue subject proceeding grant beyond powers itself. Taylor v. 258 89, 91 (CA2 1958); Vandenberge 147 167, 168 (CA5), cert. denied, 325 875, 65 1556, 89 L.Ed. 1993 (1945). Gooch Milling & Elevator Co., 320 418, 64 184, 88 139 (1943). But cf. Hormel Helvering, 312 552, 61 719, 85 1037 (1941); Singleton Wulff, 428 106, 120-121, 96 2868, 2877, 49 826 (1976). 8 clearly bounds. Its jurisdiction, "to decisio[n] latter court's "there amount $22,159.72 [respondent's] Federal tax." 28a. ruled correct. duty, then, decision. empowered proceed further other questions relating penalty—questions presented, could possibly Court—or itself provide. 9 Interest separately mandated 6601(a). A penalty accrues 6651(a)(3) separate outside scope here assessed, rendered 6213(a). limited general equitable powers. supra. course, opportunity litigate proper procedure pay sue their refund appropriate Claims Circuit former latter, those issues appeal. 11 passing fact Appeals' challenge unpublished carries weight our case. regardless nonpublication assumed lack precedential effect ruling unpublished. 12 Certiorari reversed. 13 so ordered. 14 Justice MARSHALL, dissenting. 15 I continue troubled willingness dispose petitions certiorari through summary per curiam opinions, benefit briefing merits full record proceedings below. elaborated view before, Montana Hall, 481 400, 405, n. 1, 107 1825, 1827-1828, 354 (1987) (MARSHALL, J., dissenting), Justices id., S.Ct., 1828, admonition bears repeating. 16 My doubts about dispositions encompass concerns both parties who seek integrity, perceived actual, proceedings. Rules urge litigants focus exceptional need underlying Summary disposition thus flies face legitimate expectations seeking redress deprives them argue claims before judgment. Moreover, encouraged because expect deserve it, leads greater accuracy decisions. Briefing helps reduce much possible inevitable incidence error confusion opinions each Term. Finally, practice demonstrates insufficient respect judges own dissenting colleagues 17 adhere whenever contemplates disposition, below invite supplemental briefs they wish. remain unconvinced slight modification unduly burden benefits increasing fairness decisionmaking according more justify these modest accommodations.

Category: 8