Legal Opinion

McNaughton v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims

Decided August 5, 2014No. 1:13-cv-00288PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Pro Se; refund claim untimely under 26 U.S.C. § 6511(a); lack of jurisdiction to hear partner-level refund suits under 26 U.S.C. § 7422

OPINION AND ORDER

FIRESTONE, Judge.

In this tax refund suit, pro se plaintiffs Christopher J. McNaughton and Judith I. MeNaughton, husband and wife (collectively, “the plaintiffs” or “the McNaughtons”), seek $154,900 plus interest and unspecified penalties stemming from their 2005 and 2007 tax years. Their three-count complaint seeks tax refunds related to accumulated passive losses from several federally registered Publicly Traded Partnerships (“PTPs”).…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Arbaugh v. Y & H Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 2006
  2. John R. Sand & Gravel Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2008
  3. Jan's Helicopter Service, Inc. v. Federal Aviation AdministrationCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2008
  4. John R. Sand & Gravel Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2008
  5. United States v. BrockampSupreme Court of the United States · 1997

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. General Mills, Inc. and Subsidiaries v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2015
  2. Angelo v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2021
  3. Biloxi Marsh Lands Corporation v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2021
  4. General Mills, Inc. and Subsidiaries v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2015

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API