- 5 -
1960)); see Abatti v. Commissioner, supra. The Court of Appeals
for the Second Circuit has adopted the following definition of
the phrase "fraud on the court" that is set forth in 7 Moore,
Moore's Federal Practice, par. 60.33, at 515 (2d ed. 1974):
"Fraud on the court" should, we believe, embrace only
that species of fraud which does or attempts to, defile
the court itself, or is a fraud perpetrated by officers
of the court so that the judicial machinery can not
perform in the usual manner its impartial task of
adjudging cases * * *.
See Senate Realty Corp. v. Commissioner, supra at 931; Kupferman
v. Consolidated Research & Manufacturing Corp., 459 F.2d 1072,
1078 (2d Cir. 1972); see also Abatti v. Commissioner, 86 T.C.
1319, 1325 (1986), affd. 859 F.2d 115 (9th Cir. 1988).
In order to prove fraud on the Court, petitioners have the
burden of establishing that "an intentional plan of deception
designed to improperly influence the Court in its decision has
had such an effect on the Court." Abatti v. Commissioner, supra
at 1325; see Drobny v. Commissioner, 113 F.3d 670, 677-678 (7th
Cir. 1997), affg. T.C. Memo. 1995-209, and cases cited therein.
Petitioners argue that this Court has the power to vacate
the decision in this case under Rule 162 or rule 60(b) of the
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.4 Although petitioners' motion
4 Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) provides in pertinent part:
On motion and upon such terms as are just, the court may
relieve a party or a party's legal representative from a
final judgment, order, or proceeding for the following
(continued...)
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011