- 12 -
retain Ted Merriam to represent her in this case or authorize
anyone else to retain him.
B. Whether the Decision Was Entered as a Result of Fraud on the
Court
1. Background
Generally, we lack jurisdiction to vacate a decision once it
becomes final. Abatti v. Commissioner, 859 F.2d 115, 117-118
(9th Cir. 1988), affg. 86 T.C. 1319 (1986); Cinema '84 v.
Commissioner, 122 T.C. 264, 270 (2004). However, we have
jurisdiction to set aside a decision obtained by fraud on the
Court. Toscano v. Commissioner, 441 F.2d 930, 933-934 (9th Cir.
1971), vacating 52 T.C. 295 (1969).
Fraud on the court is an unconscionable plan or scheme which
is designed to improperly influence the court in its decisions.
Abatti v. Commissioner, supra at 118. With specific facts which
plainly impugn the official record, the moving party must
establish by clear and convincing evidence that decision resulted
from fraud on the court. Drobny v. Commissioner, 113 F.3d 670,
677 (7th Cir. 1997) (quoting Kenner v. Commissioner, 387 F.2d
689, 691 (7th Cir. 1968)), affg. T.C. Memo. 1995-209; England v.
Doyle, 281 F.2d 304, 309-310 (9th Cir. 1960); Atchison, Topeka &
Santa Fe Ry. Co. v. Barrett, 246 F.2d 846, 849 (9th Cir. 1957).
The concept of fraud on the court applies narrowly in the
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011