Terry L. Lindsay - Page 8




                                                - 8 -                                                  
                  X           THE “CLEAN HANDS” DOCTRINE (UNCLEAN HANDS OF                             
                              RESPONDENT)                                                              
                  X           ILLEGALITY                                                               
                  X           FAILURE OF JURISDICTION OVER PETITIONER                                  
                             DISCHARGE IN BANKRUPTCY                                                  
                  OTHER________________________________________                                        
                                                                                                      
                  A petition filed under section 6330(d)(1)(A) must contain                            
            “Clear and concise assignments of each and every error”.  Rule                             
            331(b)(4).  Further, “clear and concise lettered statements of                             
            the facts on which the petitioner bases each assignment of error”                          
            must be contained in the petition.  Rule 331(b)(5).  If any issue                          
            is not raised in the petition, it “shall be deemed to be                                   
            conceded.”  Rule 331(b)(4).  Further, the prayer for relief shall                          
            be set forth in the petition.  Rule 331(b)(6).  Petitioner was                             
            not represented by counsel at the time he filed his petition.                              
            Petitioner, nevertheless, has an obligation to comply with the                             
            Rules of this Court.  The broad and general issues that                                    
            petitioner raised do not even come close to complying with those                           
            Rules.5  In any event, the issues that petitioner presented                                
            throughout the proceedings in this case do not raise a genuine                             
            issue of material fact.                                                                    
                  At the Appeals hearing, petitioner attempted to challenge                            
            the underlying tax liability.  Specifically, petitioner argued                             


                  5In his petition, petitioner presents a laundry list of                              
            defenses to his tax liability and to the proposed collection                               
            activity.  Petitioner alleged no facts in support of those                                 
            defenses in his petition, in the Appeals hearing, or in documents                          
            submitted to IRS Appeals or this Court.  Our review of the record                          
            shows that the defenses pleaded by petitioner have no merit.                               





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011