- 3 -
his current child support and child support arrearage
obligations, Aguirre “shall execute the necessary I.R.S. forms to
transfer the exemption” to petitioner.
Subsequently, on July 1, 1999, there was an evidentiary
hearing concerning custody at which petitioner was present and
represented by counsel, but Aguirre was neither present nor
represented by counsel. After this hearing the divorce court
issued an order in open court on September 10, 1999, nunc pro
tunc to July 27, 1999 (temporary child custody order), granting
temporary custody of the children to petitioner. The temporary
child custody order states that “apparently, the Mother
[Aguirre], has taken the children, and he [petitioner] is not
able to exercise his visitation at the present time”, and that
Aguirre was in violation of a prior visitation order.1
On his 1999 Federal income tax return, petitioner claimed
dependency exemption deductions for the three children. He did
not attach to that tax return a copy of Form 8332, Release of
Claim to Exemption for Child of Divorced or Separated Parents, or
any statement conforming to the substance of Form 8332.
1 Petitioner contends that Aguirre is involved with a cult
and has abducted the children to Mexico. These allegations are
not disputed by respondent. However, this Court is a court of
limited jurisdiction. Sec. 7442. “We may only exercise
jurisdiction to the extent expressly permitted by Congress.”
Judge v. Commissioner, 88 T.C. 1175, 1180-1181 (1987). A remedy
for the alleged abduction of petitioner’s children is beyond this
Court’s jurisdiction, and, accordingly, we have not considered
this matter further.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011