No. 18-1425

Naren Chaganti v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

Lower Court: Eighth Circuit
Docketed: 2019-05-14
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Response Waived
Tags: binding court-order hearsay hearsay-exception internal-revenue-code internal-revenue-code-162(f) litigation-sanctions parties standing stipulations tax-court-rule tax-court-rule-91-a-e tax-court-stipulations tax-cuts-and-jobs-act tax-cuts-and-jobs-act-2017
Key Terms:
Securities
Latest Conference: 2019-06-13
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether stipulations filed under Tax Court Rule 91(a) & (e) are binding on the parties and the Tax Court

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1) Whether stipulations filed under Tax Court Rule 91(a) & (e) are binding on the parties and the Tax Court. 2) Whether statements in a court order in one case may be used for their truth in a different case over a hearsay objection. 3) Whether litigation sanctions ordered by a district court and paid to an opposing party are “fines” or “penalties” “paid to a government” under Internal Revenue Code § 162(f) (2006), in light of the change to the code section enacted in the Tax Cuts & Jobs Act of 2017.

Docket Entries

2019-06-17
Petition DENIED.
2019-05-28
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/13/2019.
2019-05-22
Waiver of right of respondent Commissioner of Internal Revenue to respond filed.
2019-05-10
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due June 13, 2019)

Attorneys

Commissioner of Internal Revenue
Noel J. FranciscoSolicitor General, Respondent
Noel J. FranciscoSolicitor General, Respondent
Naren Chaganti
Naren ChagantiLaw Offices of Naren Chaganti, Petitioner
Naren ChagantiLaw Offices of Naren Chaganti, Petitioner