Jeffrey R. Taylor - Page 11

                                       - 11 -                                         
          concurrently.  It is for these reasons that generally the courts            
          have held the civil action in abeyance while the criminal                   
          prosecution goes forth.  See id. at 12 n.27.  See also United               
          States v. Eight Thousand Eight Hundred and Fifty Dollars ($8,850)           
          in United States Currency, 461 U.S. 555 (1983), where the Supreme           
          Court held that the delay by the United States in instituting a             
          civil forfeiture action pending resolution of criminal charges              
          was reasonable.                                                             
               While the general policy of the Internal Revenue Service may           
          be not to proceed with the civil aspects, that policy must be               
          implemented in each case.  In Campbell v. Eastland, 307 F.2d at             
          487, a case involving civil discovery while criminal proceedings            
          were pending, the Court of Appeals noted:                                   
               The very fact that there is a clear distinction between                
               civil and criminal actions requires a government policy                
               determination of priority:  which case should be tried                 
               first.  Administrative policy gives priority to the public             
               interest in law enforcement.  This seems so necessary and              
               wise that a trial judge should give substantial weight to it           
               in balancing the policy against the right of a civil                   
               litigant to a reasonably prompt determination of his civil             
               claims or liabilities.                                                 
          Just as a trial judge must balance the competing interests,                 
          respondent's officers must decide whether the civil aspects in a            
          particular case outweigh the interests in the criminal aspects.             
          The decision here was made by not issuing the notice of                     
          deficiency and allowing the normal periods of limitations to                
          expire.  A decision is made after an evaluation of the criminal             

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011