Curtis B. Keene - Page 8

                                        - 8 -                                         
          did not want to have a hearing if he could not record it, so he             
          left with his recording equipment.                                          
               On June 11, 2002, respondent issued to petitioner a Notice             
          of Determination Concerning Collection Actions(s) Under Section             
          6320 and/or 6330.  The notice of determination stated that                  
          respondent determined that, after balancing the need for                    
          efficient collection against petitioner’s arguments, it was                 
          appropriate to proceed with the levy action.                                
               On July 12, 2002, petitioner filed with the Court a timely             
          Petition for Lien or Levy Action.  The only issue raised in the             
          petition pertains to the Appeals officer’s decision to preclude             
          petitioner from recording the hearing.  The petition states in              
          pertinent part:                                                             
               Petitioner states that the determination action by the                 
               Appeals Office in this instant case was not only                       
               inappropriate, biased and prejudiced, but also an                      
               illegal action designed to deny the petitioner his due                 
               process rights to make a full and complete official                    
               record of a hearing with the government a potential                    
               adversarial relationship.                                              
          On August 12, 2002, petitioner filed an Amended Petition                    
          elaborating on his argument that he should have been permitted to           
          audio record the hearing.                                                   
               After filing an answer to the amended petition, respondent             
          filed the motion for summary judgment that is pending before the            
          Court.  Respondent maintains that there is no dispute as to                 
          material facts and that he is entitled to judgment as a matter of           

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011