Steven Matthew Langley - Page 6

                                                 - 6 -                                                    
            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); INDOPCO, Inc. v. Commissioner, 503 U.S.                              
            79, 84 (1992); 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, supra at 658                                
            n.19; 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.  See Abrams v. Commissioner,                               
            82 T.C. 403 (1984); Rowlee v. Commissioner, 80 T.C. 1111 (1983);                              
            McCoy v. Commissioner, 76 T.C. 1027 (1981), affd. 696 F.2d 1234                               
            (9th Cir. 1983).   Further, petitioner did not file an amended                                
            petition, much less a proper amended petition, as directed by the                             
            Court in its Order dated February 20, 1996.  Rather, he filed yet                             
            another document replete with nothing other than additional tax                               
            protester rhetoric.                                                                           
                  We see no need to catalog petitioner's contentions and                                  
            painstakingly address them.  We have dealt with many of them                                  
            before.  E.g., Devon v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1995-206.                                    




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

Last modified: May 25, 2011