Legal Opinion

Earnest v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims

Decided May 2, 1995No. 94-1019TPublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Order

DIANE GILBERT WEINSTEIN, Judge.

Defendant has moved to dismiss the complaint for lack of jurisdiction. Plaintiff, who is proceeding in propria persona, opposes the motion, and argues in the alternative that the action should be transferred to a district court. After briefing and oral argument, defendant’s motion to dismiss is granted, and plaintiffs motion to transfer is denied.

Plaintiff Elza Earnest last filed an income tax return for the year 1986. App. 42-43.2 *343On June 28, 1989, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) disallowed an investment tax credit and depreciation deduction taken in…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. Bull v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1935
  2. United States v. LarionoffSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
  3. Flora v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1960
  4. Angelus Milling Co. v. CommissionerSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
  5. Bell v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1961

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

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Bernard v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2004
  2. Edelmann v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2007
  3. McCauley v. StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 1997
  4. Crocker v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 1997
  5. Betz v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 1998

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

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

Powered by the Exa API