- 8 -
challenging the assessments and tax liabilities, including those
for 1989.4
On June 6, 2003, respondent filed a motion for summary
judgment and to dismiss counterclaims. On July 10, 2003, Mrs.
Summers filed a response to respondent’s motion in which she
asserted that respondent had not properly credited petitioners’
account for the payment from Commonwealth.
On September 11, 2003, the District Court granted
respondent’s motion for summary judgment on the issue of Mrs.
Summers’s tax liabilities, dismissed Mrs. Summers’s
counterclaims, and gave respondent 30 days to present a full and
final accounting of Mrs. Summers’s tax liabilities, including
those for 1989. On October 2, 2003, respondent filed a
memorandum in response to the District Court’s September 10,
2003, order stating Mrs. Summers’s tax liabilities for 1985,
1986, 1988, and 1989, including accrued interest as of September
30, 2003, and $13,858 negligence penalty amounted to $749,760.85.
On October 31, 2003, Mrs. Summers filed a response, contending
4Mrs. Summers’s answer and cross-complaint contained, inter
alia, several frivolous tax protester type arguments including:
She is not a taxpayer within the meaning of the Internal Revenue
Code; the income Mr. Summers received and pleaded guilty to tax
evasion for was not income within the meaning of the Internal
Revenue Code; there is no “1040 tax” listed in the index of the
Internal Revenue Code; there is no legislative regulation that
requires her to file a tax return for “1040" or “income taxes”
and that the United States and its agents fraudulently misled her
to believe that compliance with the Internal Revenue Code was
mandatory.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011