- 9 -
(3d Cir. 1985), affg. T.C. Memo. 1984-367; see also Coleman v.
Commissioner, 791 F.2d 68 (7th Cir. 1986).
The Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit has recently
approved and imposed a sanction where a taxpayer insulted the
Court of Appeals, the Tax Court, and the opposing party.
Stearman v. Commissioner, 436 F.3d 533, 540 (5th Cir. 2006),
affg. T.C. Memo. 2005-39. In approving the imposition of
penalties against the taxpayer, the Court of Appeals observed
that
it is difficult to imagine a lesser sanction that would
vindicate the integrity of the court proceedings and
deter * * * [taxpayers] from similar misconduct.
Wasteful and dilatory appeals unjustifiably consume the
limited resources of the judicial system: “While
judges, staff and support personnel have expended
energy to dispose of this meritless appeal, justice has
been delayed for truly deserving litigants.” Foret v.
S. Farm Bureau Life Ins. Co., 918 F.2d 534, 539 (5th
Cir. 1990). [Id.; fn. ref. omitted.]
In deciding whether to sanction petitioner’s conduct by
imposing penalties under section 6673, we note that we will
dismiss petitioner’s cases with prejudice for failure to
prosecute because there was a record of delay and contumacious
conduct, and petitioner had been given ample opportunity to
pursue the merits of his tax dispute. A lesser sanction than
dismissal would, under the circumstances, be futile. See Tello
v. Commissioner, 410 F.3d 743, 744 (5th Cir. 2005).
Understanding that a dismissal with prejudice, in itself, is
a form of sanction, we consider whether the same actions should
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: March 27, 2008