Catherine Beverly - Page 4

                                        - 4 -                                         
          dismissing petitioner’s bankruptcy case due to her failure to               
          file required schedules.  On December 6, 2001, the bankruptcy               
          court entered an order closing petitioner’s case.                           
               In the meantime, on December 5, 2001, petitioner filed a               
          second bankruptcy petition.                                                 
               On December 19, 2001, petitioner filed with respondent a               
          Form 12153, Request for a Collection Due Process Hearing,                   
          challenging the proposed levy.                                              
               On May 17, 2002, the bankruptcy court dismissed petitioner’s           
          second bankruptcy case.                                                     
               On June 5, 2003, respondent issued to petitioner a Notice of           
          Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320            
          and/or 6330 (notice of determination) which stated that                     
          respondent intended to proceed with the proposed levy.  On July             
          7, 2003, petitioner filed with the Court a Petition for Lien or             
          Levy Action challenging respondent’s notice of determination.3              
          At the time the petition was filed, petitioner resided in                   
          Collinsville, Illinois.                                                     
               As indicated, respondent filed a Motion for Summary                    
          Judgment.  Respondent contends that the Court should sustain the            
          notice of determination on the ground that the Appeals officer              
          did not abuse her discretion in rejecting petitioner’s offer in             

               3  The petition arrived at the Court in an envelope bearing            
          a timely U.S. Postal Service postmark dated July 1, 2003.  See              
          sec. 7502(a).                                                               





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

Last modified: May 25, 2011