Avery v. Commissioner ( 2010 )


Menu:
  •                                                                             FILED
    NOT FOR PUBLICATION                              OCT 05 2010
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                       U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
    NATHANIEL CALEB AVERY,                           No. 07-72506
    Petitioner - Appellant,           Tax Ct. No. 17315-05
    v.
    MEMORANDUM *
    COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL
    REVENUE,
    Respondent - Appellee.
    Appeal from a Decision of the
    United States Tax Court
    Submitted September 22, 2010 **
    Before:        WALLACE, HAWKINS, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.
    The tax court properly upheld the tax determination because the
    Commissioner presented “some substantive evidence” that Nathaniel Caleb Avery
    (“Avery”) received unreported income, and Avery failed to submit any evidence
    *
    This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
    except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
    **
    The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
    without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
    showing “that the deficiency was arbitrary or erroneous.” Hardy v. Comm’r, 
    181 F.3d 1002
    , 1004 (9th Cir. 1999).
    The tax court also properly upheld the late-filing addition to tax because
    Avery did not file a tax return for 2002 or provide any evidence suggesting
    reasonable cause for his failure to do so. See 
    26 U.S.C. § 6651
    (a)(1).
    The tax court acted within its discretion when imposed a $5,000 penalty,
    after finding that Avery had instituted the proceedings primarily for delay and had
    advanced frivolous arguments. See 
    26 U.S.C. § 6673
    (a) (providing for sanctions
    up to $ 25,000 where “proceedings . . . have been instituted or maintained by the
    taxpayer primarily for delay” or where “the taxpayer’s position in such proceeding
    is frivolous or groundless”); Grimes v. Comm’r, 
    806 F.2d 1451
    , 1454 (9th Cir.
    1986) (per curiam).
    Avery’s contention that the tax court judge was biased is not supported by
    the record. See Taylor v. Regents of Univ. of Cal., 
    993 F.2d 710
    , 712 (9th Cir.
    1993) (adverse rulings alone are insufficient to demonstrate judicial bias).
    Avery’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.
    AFFIRMED.
    2                                    07-72506
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 07-72506

Judges: Wallace, Hawkins, Thomas

Filed Date: 10/5/2010

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024