- 4 -
Rule 162, and the decision herein became final on December 3,
1996. See sec. 7481(a)(1); Fed. R. App. P. 13(a).
Petitioners' motion was filed on August 29, 1997, almost a
year after the Court entered the decision in this case. Once a
decision becomes final, the Court may vacate it only in narrowly
circumscribed situations, such as where the decision was obtained
through fraud on the Court, see Abatti v. Commissioner, 859 F.2d
115, 118 (9th Cir. 1988), affg. 86 T.C. 1319 (1986); Senate Real-
ty Corp. v. Commissioner, 511 F.2d 929, 931 n.1 (2d Cir. 1975),
or where the decision is void or a legal nullity for lack of this
Court's jurisdiction over either the subject matter or the party,
see Billingsley v. Commissioner, 868 F.2d 1081, 1084-1085 (9th
Cir. 1989); Abeles v. Commissioner, 90 T.C. 103, 105-106 (1988).3
The Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has defined the
phrase "fraud on the court" to be "'an unconscionable plan or
scheme which is designed to improperly influence the court in its
decision.'" Toscano v. Commissioner, 441 F.2d 930, 934 (9th Cir.
1971) (quoting England v. Doyle, 281 F.2d 304, 309 (9th Cir.
2(...continued)
effect at relevant times. Unless otherwise indicated, all Rule
references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure.
3 The Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit has indicated that
in extraordinary circumstances this Court has the power in its
discretion to vacate and correct a final decision where it is
based on a mutual mistake of fact. See La Floridienne J.
Buttgenbach & Co. v. Commissioner, 63 F.2d 630 (5th Cir. 1933).
But see Harbold v. Commissioner, 51 F.3d 618, 621-622 (6th Cir.
1995).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011