Howard E. Clendenen v. CIR, No. 06-3877 (8th Cir. 2007)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Civil case - Federal Tax. Tax court lacked jurisdiction to entertain and deny taxpayer's Rule 60(b) motion as it was filed on an untimely basis and there were no extraordinary circumstances which would have given the court jurisdiction to modify or vacate its judgment; denial of motion to vacate is vacated.
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________ No. 06-3877 ___________ Howard E. Clendenen, * * Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * Tax Court. * Commissioner of Internal Revenue, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellee. * ___________ Submitted: September 7, 2007 Filed: September 20, 2007 ___________ Before MURPHY, SMITH, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges. ___________ PER CURIAM. Howard Clendenen appeals the tax court s denial of his Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b) motion. Upon de novo review, see Arkansas Oil and Gas, Inc. v. Comm r, 114 F.3d 795, 798 (8th Cir. 1997) (standard of review), we conclude that the tax court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the motion because it was filed approximately two-and-a-half years after the court s decision became final, and no extraordinary circumstances existed that would have given the court jurisdiction to modify or vacate its judgment. See Arkansas Oil and Gas, 114 F.3d at 799-800 (vacating tax court s denial of taxpayer s motion to vacate because tax court lacked jurisdiction to hear motion after tax court s decision became final, absent extraordinary circumstances); cf. Kansas Pub. Employees Ret. Sys. v. Reimer & Koger Assoc., 194 F.3d 922, 925- 26 (8th Cir. 1999) (upholding district court s denial of Rule 60(b) motion because change in law is not by itself an extraordinary circumstance, and district court did not abuse its discretion in giving weight to equitable considerations in denying motion). Accordingly, we vacate the tax court s denial of Clendenen s motion to vacate. ______________________________ -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.
