- 16 -
articulating their position respecting respondent's Response to
their motion for leave, to which we now turn.
2. Petitioners' Motion for Reconsideration
The Tax Court generally lacks jurisdiction to vacate a final
decision. 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), affd. per curiam 352 U.S. 1027 (1957).
The Court will vacate a final decision only in certain narrowly
circumscribed situations. For instance, this Court and some
Courts of Appeals, including the Court of Appeals for the Ninth
Circuit, have ruled that this Court may vacate a final decision
if that decision is shown to be void, or a legal nullity, for
lack of 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);
Brannon's of Shawnee, Inc. v. Commissioner, supra at 1002, or if
the decision was obtained through fraud upon the Court, see
Abatti v. Commissioner, supra; 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); Toscano v.
Commissioner, 441 F.2d at 933; Kenner v. Commissioner, supra;
Casey v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1992-672.
As previously mentioned, in Richards I we rejected
petitioners' contention that the notice of deficiency issued to
them was invalid and that the Court lacked jurisdiction to enter
Page: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011