- 6 -
1. Authority of the Tax Court To Vacate a Decision
While not raised in the motion to vacate lodged with the
Court, the initial question is whether this Court has the
authority to reopen a case where the decision of this Court has
been affirmed, modified, or reversed by the Court of Appeals. In
Lydon v. Commissioner, 56 T.C. 128 (1971), the Court was faced
with a “Motion for Leave to File a Petition to Reopen Proofs
[sic]” filed after the decision of this Court had been affirmed
by the Court of Appeals.2 The gravamen of the motion was that
the decision of this Court was based on perjured testimony. We
assumed that the allegation was correct. Nonetheless, we found
that the motion was “analogous to one filed in a Federal District
Court under Rule 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure”,
id. at 129, and we applied the then majority view “that since the
decided cases reveal that Rule 60(b) * * * does not change the
usual requirement of leave of the appellate court, a fortiori,
such leave is required where, as is the case herein, the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure are not technically applicable to this
Court”, id. at 131.
In Transp. Manufacturing & Equip. Co. v. Commissioner, T.C.
Memo. 1971-178, a decision of this Court had been appealed to the
2 See Lydon v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1964-27, affd. 351
F.2d 539 (7th Cir. 1965).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011