- 275 -
See Drobny v. Commissioner, supra at 677-678 (citing Kenner v.
Commissioner, 387 F.2d 689 (7th Cir. 1968)); Broyhill Furniture
Indus., Inc. v. Craftmaster Furniture Corp., supra at 1085; In re
Intermagnetics Am., Inc., 926 F.2d 912, 916 (9th Cir. 1991)
(citing Alexander v. Robertson, 882 F.2d 421, 424 (9th Cir.
1989)); Senate Realty Corp. v. Commissioner, 511 F.2d 929, 931
(2d Cir. 1975).
The Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has addressed
the issue of fraud on the court in a number of cases. Before
proceeding with our analysis, we will glean these cases for the
insights they yield on the views of the Court of Appeals.
In Toscano v. Commissioner, 441 F.2d 930 (9th Cir. 1971),
the taxpayer, Josephine Zelasko (Zelasko), asserted that the Tax
Court had erred in failing to vacate a decision entered against
Zelasko and her purported husband, John Toscano. Zelasko argued
that the decision should be vacated on the ground of fraud on the
Court because she was never married to Toscano, her signatures
were placed on joint tax returns with Toscano either by forgery
or under duress, and she was completely unaware that Toscano had
filed a joint petition for redetermination with the Tax Court.
After concluding that the Tax Court had the authority to set
aside a final decision on the ground of fraud on the court, the
Court of Appeals vacated this Court's decision against Zelasko
after finding that she had alleged sufficient facts in support of
her claim of fraud on the court to justify an evidentiary hearing
Page: Previous 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011