- 5 -
Once a decision becomes final, the Court's jurisdiction to
vacate it is restricted to two circumstances. Manchester Group
v. Commissioner, 113 F.3d 1087, 1088 (9th Cir. 1997), revg. T.C.
Memo. 1994-604; Abatti v. Commissioner, 859 F.2d 115, 117 (9th
Cir. 1988), affg. 86 T.C. 1319 (1986); Lasky v. Commissioner, 235
F.2d 97, 100 (9th Cir. 1956), affg. 22 T.C. 13 (1954), affd. 352
U.S. 1027 (1957). First, the Court may vacate an ostensibly
final decision if it lacked jurisdiction to enter the decision
originally. Billingsley v. Commissioner, 868 F.2d 1081, 1084-
1085 (9th Cir. 1989); see also Abeles v. Commissioner, 90 T.C.
103, 105-106 (1988); Brannon's of Shawnee, Inc. v. Commissioner,
69 T.C. 999, 1002 (1978). The Court may also vacate a final
decision if it was obtained through fraud on the Court.4 Abatti
v. Commissioner, supra; see also Senate Realty Corp. v.
Commissioner, 511 F.2d 929, 931 n.1 (2d Cir. 1975); Stickler v.
Commissioner, 464 F.2d 368, 370 (3d Cir. 1972).
Petitioners do not allege that the Court lacked jurisdiction
to enter the decisions at issue in these cases, or that the
decisions arose from either a fraud on the Court or mutual
mistake. Instead, petitioners' motions for leave are based
4The Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit has indicated
that this Court also has jurisdiction to vacate a final decision
which is based on a mutual mistake of fact. See La Floridienne
J. Buttgenbach & Co. v. Commissioner, 63 F.2d 630 (5th Cir.
1933). But cf. Harbold v. Commissioner, 51 F.3d 618, 621-622
(6th Cir. 1995).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011