Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

804 F.2d 872

Docket No. 86-2222

Stelly v. Commissioner

Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals

Decided Nov. 25, 1986.

Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1986-11-25

Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently January 1987

3 federal appellate ·

2 counsel of record

Relies on Stelly v. Commissioner

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Opinion by (per_curiam) · Decided 1986-11-25

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1Summary Calendar.

¶2C. Warren Stelly, M.D. Stelly, pro se.

¶3Mary Vance, Atty., Tax Div., Dept, of Justice, Dallas, Tex., Roger M. Olsen, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tax Div., U.S. Dept, of Justice, Michael L. Paup, Chief, William A. Whit-ledge, Gary R. Allen, Reviewer, Appellate Section, Washington, D.C., for defendantappellee.

¶4Before CLARK, Chief Judge, GAR-WOOD and HILL, Circuit Judges.

¶5PER CURIAM:

¶6In our opinion filed today in Stelly v. Commissioner, 804 F.2d 868(Stelly II), we imposed a sanction of $2,000 on the Stellys jointly and prohibited their filing of any appeals relating to tax litigation until they provided proof that the sanction was paid. See Stelly II, 804 F.2d at 871 & n. 2. In this action, the Stellys challenge assessments made by the Commissioner in regard to their 1983 income tax return on the same theories they asserted in Stelly II. The district court granted the Commissioner’s motion to dismiss and the Stellys filed an appeal.

¶7Enough judicial resources have been wasted on the Stellys’ jousting with the income tax laws. For the same reasons *873expressed in our opinion in Stelly II, we find the appeal in this case to be frivolous. Consequently, we impose a monetary sanction in this case of $2,000 on the Stellys jointly and direct the Clerk of the Court not to accept any new filings by the Stellys for any tax related appeals until the sanctions imposed in this case and in Stelly II are paid and proof of satisfaction of all prior judgments is provided.1

¶8AFFIRMED.

/804/f2d/872 · .json · Public domain