USA v. David Stewart, et al, No. 15-20596 (5th Cir. 2016)
Annotate this CaseThis opinion or order relates to an opinion or order originally issued on October 13, 2016.
Download PDF
Case: 15-20596 Document: 00513796623 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/14/2016 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 15-20596 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff -Appellant, v. DAVID W. STEWART; TARAF. STEWART; RICHARD K. PLATO; TINAM. PLATO, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division USDC NO. 4:10-cv-00294 ON PETITION FOR PANEL REHEARING Before DAVIS, ELROD, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges. PERCURIAM: IT IS ORDERED that the petition for panel rehearing is DENIED. As Appellees point out in the petition for panel rehearing, the opinion mistakenly referenced Appellees' tax returns in Part III and not the Odyssey partnership return. Part III of the opinion should have stated that Odyssey's amended Form 1065 did not substantially comply with the regulatory requirements of an AAR. See Samueli v. C.I.R., 132 T.C. 336, 346 (2009) (holding that an amended return did not substantially comply with the requirements of an AAR because, in part, it "did not include all information required to be provided on a Form Case: 15-20596 Document: 00513796623 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/14/2016 No. 15-20596 8082"). The rest of the opinion's analysis, including its reliance on Rigas v. United States, 486 F. App'x 491 (5th Cir. 2013), remains unchanged. ENTERED FOR THE COURT: STATES CIRCUIT JUDGE 2
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.
