Case Resources
Search this Case
in Google
Scholar
on the Web
Google Web
Search
MSN Web
Search
Yahoo! Web
Search
in the News
Google News
Search
Google
News Archive Search
Yahoo!
News Search
in the Blogs
BlawgSearch.com Search
Google Blog
Search
Technorati
Blog Search
in other Databases
Google Book
Search
Justia Research Resources
Justia.com
Supreme Court Center
US Regulation Tracker
US District Court Opinions
Federal District Court Civil Case Filings
Legal Blog Search
Legal Podcast Search
USA Constitution Annotated
Online Research Resources
Cornell LII
Cornell Wex Dictionary & Encyclopedia
LLRX.com - Legal Research
Expert Witness Directory
Nolo Consumer & Business
US Court Forms
WashLaw Directory
World LII
Cases Provided By
Creative Commons
public.resource.org
Frances Schuster Schaffner, Appellant, v. John H. Bingler, Director of Internal Revenue, Appellee
United States Court of Appeals Third Circuit. - 268 F.2d 76
Argued May 4, 1959.Decided May 7, 1959
Leonard Shapiro, Pittsburgh, Pa., for appellant.
George W. Beatty, Washington, D.C. (Charles K. Rice, Asst. Atty. Gen., Lee A. Jackson, A. F. Prescott, Attys., Dept. of Justice, Washington, D.C., Hubert I. Teitelbaum, U.S. Atty., Thomas J. Shannon, Asst. U.S. Atty., Pittsburgh, Pa., on the brief), for appellee.
Before McLAUGHLIN, KALODNER and STALEY, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM.
Appellant seeks to enjoin the taxing authorities from collecting the tax due under a final decision of the Tax Court. The order of the Tax Court determining that appellant was liable for the income taxes involved was entered with the consent of appellant. No petition for review of that decision was ever filed. We think Section 7421 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, 26 U.S.C.A. 7421, providing that no suit shall be maintained in any court to restrain the assessment or collection or any tax or transferee liability, is clearly applicable in this instance. And here where the jurisdiction of the Tax Court was properly invoked and its decision having become final, the district court has no jurisdiction to reopen that decision. Lasky v. Commissioner, 9 Cir., 1956, 235 F.2d 97, affirmed per curiam, 1957, 352 U.S. 1027, 77 S.Ct. 594, 1 L.Ed.2d 598; White's Will v. Commissioner, 3 Cir., 1944, 142 F.2d 746.
The order of the district court will be affirmed.