- 8 -
you filed were frivolous and chose to ignore the clear
warning issued in writing.
Before you decide whether to petition this notice of
determination, you should know that the Tax Court is
empowered to impose monetary sanctions up to $25,000.00
for instituting or maintaining an action before it
primarily for delay or for taking a position that is
frivolous or groundless. (See the copy of Pierson v.
Commissioner * * * that was provided at the Hearing.)
It is our view that the positions you have taken have
no merit and are groundless.
Petitioner filed a petition with the Court with respect to
the notice of determination relating to petitioner’s unpaid
liability for 1999. The petition contains statements,
contentions, arguments, and requests that the Court finds to be
frivolous and/or groundless.6
Discussion
The Court may grant summary judgment where there is no
genuine issue of material fact and a decision may be rendered as
a matter of law. Rule 121(b); Sundstrand Corp. v. Commissioner,
98 T.C. 518, 520 (1992), affd. 17 F.3d 965 (7th Cir. 1994). We
conclude that there are no genuine issues of material fact
regarding the questions raised in respondent’s motion.
Petitioner did not file a petition with the Court with
respect to the notice of deficiency that respondent issued to him
relating to his taxable year 1999. Where, as is the case here,
6The frivolous and/or groundless statements, contentions,
arguments, and requests in petitioner’s petition are similar to
the frivolous and/or groundless statements, contentions,
arguments, and requests in petitions filed by certain other
taxpayers with cases in the Court. See, e.g., Copeland v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2003-46.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011