Alan Zinstein v. US, No. 13-2456 (4th Cir. 2014)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-2456 ALAN ZINSTEIN; JANE SILK, Plaintiffs - Appellants, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior District Judge. (1:13-cv-00633-JCC-IDD) Submitted: September 29, 2014 Decided: October 1, 2014 Before WILKINSON, KING, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Andrew Paul Kawel, KAWEL PLLC, Miami, Florida, for Appellants. Kathryn Keneally, Assistant Attorney General, Jonathan S. Cohen, Kenneth W. Rosenberg, Tax Division, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Alan Zinstein and Jane Silk ( Taxpayers ) appeal from the district court s orders dismissing their complaint in which they alleged that the Internal Revenue Service failed to timely release a tax lien and wrongfully levied on their property, and denying their motion for reconsideration. The district court determined to that the Taxpayers failed exhaust their administrative remedies and also filed their complaint beyond the two-year statute of limitations. The limitations period We affirm. for actions under 26 U.S.C. §§ 7432, 7433 (2012) is two years from the date the taxpayer has had a reasonable opportunity to discover elements of a possible cause of action. 1(i)(2); 301.7433-1(g)(2) (2010). because it represents a waiver all essential 26 C.F.R. §§ 301.7432- This statute of limitations, by the United States of its sovereign immunity, is a prerequisite to the district court s jurisdiction. F.3d 631, 637 See Gandy Nursery, Inc. v. United States, 318 (5th Cir. 2003) (upholding district court s dismissal of untimely 26 U.S.C. § 7433 claim for lack of subject matter jurisdiction). Here, the causes of action in Taxpayers complaint April Service accrued first in levied upon 2008, the when the Taxpayers Internal Revenue property. See Keohane v. United States, 669 F.3d 325, 329 (D.C. Cir. 2012) (holding that continuing violation 2 did not apply to § 7433 action, but rather cause of action accrued when taxpayer knew of levy); Snyder v. United States, 260 F. App x 488, 493 (3d Cir. 2008); Macklin v. United States, 300 F.3d 814, 824 (7th Cir. 2002) (rejecting continuing violation theory in circumstance where there is a single alleged wrong, the filing of a tax lien ). The complaint, filed in May 2013, was filed beyond the two-year limitations period, and therefore the district court properly dismissed it for lack of jurisdiction. Accordingly, dismissing the action reconsideration. facts and materials legal before we affirm for lack the of district court s jurisdiction and orders denying We dispense with oral argument because the contentions are adequately this and argument court presented would not in the aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 3
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
