Duane B. and Linda L. Erwin, et al. - Page 9

                                                  - 9 -                                                    
            U.S. 41, 45-46 (1957); Price v. Moody, 677 F.2d 676, 677 (8th                                  
            Cir. 1982).                                                                                    
                  Rule 34(b)(4) requires that a petition filed in this Court                               
            contain clear and concise assignments of each and every error                                  
            which the taxpayer alleges to have been committed by the                                       
            Commissioner in the determination of the deficiency in dispute.                                
            Rule 34(b)(5) further requires that the petition contain clear                                 
            and concise lettered statements of the facts on which the                                      
            taxpayer bases the assignments of error.  See Jarvis v.                                        
            Commissioner, 78 T.C. 646, 658 (1982).  The failure of a petition                              
            to conform with the requirements set forth in Rule 34 may be                                   
            grounds for dismissal.  Rules 34(a)(1); 123(b).                                                
                  In general, the determinations made by the Commissioner in a                             
            notice of deficiency are presumed to be correct, and the taxpayer                              
            bears the burden of proving that those determinations are                                      
            erroneous.  Rule 142(a); Welch v. Helvering, 290 U.S. 111, 115                                 
            (1933).  Moreover, any issue not raised in the pleadings is                                    
            deemed to be conceded.  Rule 34(b)(4); Jarvis v. Commissioner, 78                              
            T.C. 646, 658 n.19 (1982); Gordon v. Commissioner, 73 T.C. 736,                                
            739 (1980).                                                                                    
                  The petition filed in this case does not satisfy the                                     
            requirements of Rule 34(b)(4) and (5).  There is neither                                       
            assignment of error nor allegation of fact in support of any                                   
            justiciable claim.  Rather, there is nothing but tax protester                                 
            rhetoric and legalistic gibberish, as demonstrated by the                                      




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011