Court Opinion

ID: 2965252
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-21 21:37:55.043447+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:01:43.194235
License: Public Domain

USCA1 Opinion

	

                         [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

                    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                         FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT

                         ____________________

No. 97-1881

                         JULIAN R. MCDERMOTT,
                        and CAROL L. MCDERMOTT,

                        Plaintiffs, Appellants,

                                  v.

                       UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                         Defendant, Appellee.

                         ____________________

             APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

                   FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

              [Hon. Patti B. Saris, U.S. District Judge]

                         ____________________

                                Before

                         Selya, Circuit Judge,
                      Cyr, Senior Circuit Judge,
                      and Boudin, Circuit Judge.

                         ____________________

    Julian R. McDermott on brief pro se.
         Loretta C. Argrett, Assistant Attorney General, Donald K. Stern,
United States Attorney, Robert L. Baker, Attorney, Tax Division,
Department of Justice, and David English Carmack, Attorney, Tax
Division, Department of Justice, on brief for appellee.

                         ____________________
                           March 18, 1998

                                             
            Per Curiam.  We have carefully reviewed the record and
    briefs on appeal and affirm the judgment below.  The only issue
  raised below, thus the only issue properly before us,   is
    whether summary judgment was improper because the date on which
    the appellant filed his 1987 tax return was in genuine dispute. 
    In response to the government's showing that the appellant had
    no evidence that his return was filed on time, he was required
    to adduce specific facts which could reasonably support a
    decision in his favor.  Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. 477
    U.S. 242, 248 (1986).  At a minimum, he would have had to show
    that he timely and properly mailed his claim.  He did not
    discharge this obligation.  Rogers v. Fair, 902 F.2d 140, 143
    (1st Cir. 1990).
        Affirmed.  Loc. R. 27.1.