Opinion · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Franklet v. United States

Franklet v. United States, 761 F.2d 529 (9th Cir. 1985)

Type
Opinion
Court
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction
Federal
Date
1985-05-21
Topic
bankruptcy

OPINION Before HALL and WIGGINS, Circuit Judges, and SMITH,* District Judge. PER CURIAM: In these eleven cases, which were consolidated for this hearing, the appellants all filed income tax returns making claims for war tax credits or deductions. The Internal Revenue Service penalized the appellants for filing “frivolous” income tax returns (26 U.S.C. § 6702) for the year 1982. Appellants challenged the assessments in the District Court for the Northern District of California. Judgments in favor of the United States were entered in all cases. *530For the reasons stated in the opinion in Franklet v.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed Franklet v. United States. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by
5 opinions
FRANKLET v. UNITED STATES,761 F.2d 529(9th Cir. 1985)
SHARON FRANKLET, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
DEFENDANT-APPELLEE.
DINAH BACHRACH, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
DEFENDANT-APPELLEE.
JOHN McCHESNEY-YOUNG AND ANN L. McCHESNEY-YOUNG, PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS, v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, DEFENDANT-APPELLEE.
KOLYA M. BRAUN, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
DEFENDANT-APPELLEE.
MARY McKENNA, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
DEFENDANT-APPELLEE.
JAMES T. AYERS, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
DEFENDANT-APPELLEE.
JUDITH L. KAPLAN, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
DEFENDANT-APPELLEE.
TIMOTHY A. PEARCE, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
DEFENDANT-APPELLEE.
BETTY WINKLER, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
DEFENDANT-APPELLEE.
PETER C. BREWER AND FAITH J. BREWER, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANTS, v. UNITED STATES
OF AMERICA, DEFENDANT-APPELLEE.
EUGENE A. WIENS, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
DEFENDANT-APPELLEE.
Nos. 84-1745 to 84-1752, 84-2022 to 84-2024.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Argued and Submitted April 9, 1985.
Decided May 21, 1985.
Rocky N. Unruh, San Francisco, Cal., for plaintiffs-appellants.

Elaine F. Ferris, Dept. of Justice, Washington, D.C., for defendant-appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California; William W Schwarzer and Thelton E. Henderson, District Judges.
[1] OPINION
Before HALL and WIGGINS, Circuit Judges, and SMITH,fn*District Judge.
PER CURIAM:
[2] In these eleven cases, which were consolidated for this hearing, the appellants all filed income tax returns making claims for war tax credits or deductions. The Internal Revenue Service penalized the appellants for filing "frivolous" income tax returns (26 U.S.C. § 6702) for the year 1982. Appellants challenged the assessments in the District Court for the Northern District of California. Judgments in favor of the United States were entered in all cases.Page 530For the reasons stated in the opinion inFranklet v. United States,578 F. Supp. 1552(N.D.Cal. 1984),1we affirm the judgments.

[3] We note that, since the decision inFranklet,similar results have been reached inWall v. United States,756 F.2d 52(8th Cir. 1985);Kahn v. United States,753 F.2d 1208(3d Cir. 1985); andWelch v. United States,750 F.2d 1101(1st Cir. 1985).Seealso Jenney v. United States,755 F.2d 1384(9th Cir. 1985).
  1. The Honorable Russell E. Smith, Senior United States District Judge for the District of Montana, sitting by designation. ↩
  2. One opinion was written to decide eight of the cases which had been consolidated. Another judge, relying on the opinion inFranklet,entered judgment in the three remaining cases, which also had been consolidated. ↩