Media Space, Inc. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue , 477 F. App'x 857 ( 2012 )

11-2140
Media Space, Inc. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT
SUMMARY ORDER
RULINGS BY SUMMARY ORDER DO NOT HAVE PRECEDENTIAL EFFECT. CITATION TO A SUMMARY ORDER FILED
ON OR AFTER JANUARY 1, 2007, IS PERMITTED AND IS GOVERNED BY FEDERAL RULE OF APPELLATE
PROCEDURE 32.1 AND THIS COURT’S LOCAL RULE 32.1.1. WHEN CITING A SUMMARY ORDER IN A
DOCUMENT FILED WITH THIS COURT, A PARTY MUST CITE EITHER THE FEDERAL APPENDIX OR AN
ELECTRONIC DATABASE (WITH THE NOTATION “SUMMARY ORDER”). A PARTY CITING A SUMMARY ORDER MUST
SERVE A COPY OF IT ON ANY PARTY NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL.
1 At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals
2 for the Second Circuit, held at the Daniel Patrick Moynihan
3 United States Courthouse, 500 Pearl Street, in the City of
4 New York, on the 13th day of September, two thousand twelve.
5
6 PRESENT: DENNIS JACOBS,
7 Chief Judge,
8 GUIDO CALABRESI,
9 SUSAN L. CARNEY,
10 Circuit Judges.
11
12 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -X
13 MEDIA SPACE, INC.,
14 Petitioner-Appellee,
15
16 -v.- 11-2140
17
18 COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE,
19 Respondent-Appellant.
20 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -X
21
22 FOR APPELLANT: Arthur T. Catterall, for Dept.
23 of Justice - Appellate
24 Section/Tax Division,
25 Washington, D.C.
26
27
1
1 FOR APPELLEES: Dustin F. Hecker, Posternak
2 Blankstein & Lund LLP, Boston,
3 MA.
4
5 Appeal from an order of the United States Tax Court
6 (Goeke, J.).
7
8 UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED
9 AND DECREED that the order of the Tax Court is VACATED and
10 the case is REMANDED with instructions to dismiss.
11
12 The Commissioner appeals the Tax Court’s order allowing
13 Media Space to partially deduct forbearance payments as
14 ordinary and necessary business expenses in its 2004 and
15 2005 tax returns. We assume the parties’ familiarity with
16 the underlying facts, the procedural history, and the issues
17 presented for review.
18
19 [1] As Media Space represented in its April 4, 2012 filing
20 with this Court, “Media Space paid the full amount due with
21 respect to the tax years at issue on this appeal in
22 September 2011.” Notice of Payment of Amounts at Issue on
23 Appeal and, Alternatively, Request to Postpone Oral Argument
24 (Dkt. No. 98) (Apr. 4, 2012). Because Media Space’s alleged
25 tax deficiencies have been paid in full, no case or
26 controversy exists and this case is moot. See, e.g.,
27 Camreta v. Greene, 131 S. Ct. 2020, 2028 (2011).
28
29 [2] The Commissioner argues that this Court should
30 nonetheless address the legal questions presented in this
31 appeal. We decline to do so, because a federal court may
32 not “decide the merits of a legal question not posed in an
33 Article III case or controversy.” U.S. Bancorp Mortg. Co.
34 v. Bonner Mall P’ship, 513 U.S. 18, 21 (1994).
35
36 [3] When a case is moot on appeal, the “established
37 practice” of federal courts is to “vacate the judgment below
38 and remand with a direction to dismiss.” United States v.
39 Munsingwear, Inc., 340 U.S. 36, 39 (1950); see also Russman
40 v. Bd. of Educ. of Enlarged City Sch. Dist., 260 F.3d 114,
41 121 (2d Cir. 2001).
42
43
44
45
2
1 Finding no merit in the Commissioner’s remaining
2 arguments, we hereby VACATE the order of the Tax Court and
3 REMAND the case with instructions to dismiss the petition.
4
5
6 FOR THE COURT:
7 CATHERINE O’HAGAN WOLFE, CLERK
8
9
10
11
12
3