Legal Opinion
Facq v. United States
District Court, W.D. Washington
Decided January 6, 2005No. C03-3851CPublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
COUGHENOUR, District Judge.
I. INTRODUCTION
This matter has come before the Court on the parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment. Having carefully considered the papers filed by the parties in support of and in opposition to the motions, the Court has determined that no oral argument shall be necessary. Defendant’s motion is hereby GRANTED for the reasons that follow.
II. BACKGROUND
In April 2000, Plaintiffs filed their 1999 Form 1040 income tax return, reporting $4,541,051.91 in income tax liability. Two years later, in April 2002, Plaintiffs filed a 1999 Form 1040X claiming a refund of…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Welch v. HelveringSupreme Court of the United States · 1933
- Gary E. Wallis, Husband Carol Wallis, Wife v. J.R. Simplot CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1994
- Bagdadi v. NazarCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1996
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Palahnuk v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2007
- Palahnuk v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2006
- Facq v. Comm'rUnited States Tax Court · 2006
- Cidale v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2007
- Racine v. Comm'rUnited States Tax Court · 2006
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.