RUSSELL MCADAMS V. CIR, No. 20-72611 (9th Cir. 2021)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION SEP 22 2021 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT RUSSELL T. McADAMS, Petitioner-Appellant, v. U.S. COURT OF APPEALS No. 20-72611 Tax Ct. No. 19702-19 MEMORANDUM* COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent-Appellee. Appeal from a Decision of the United States Tax Court Submitted September 14, 2021** Before: PAEZ, NGUYEN, and OWENS, Circuit Judges. Russell T. McAdams appeals pro se from the Tax Court’s order denying his post-judgment motion for reconsideration. We have jurisdiction under 26 U.S.C. § 7482(a). We review for an abuse of discretion. Parkinson v. Comm’r, 647 F.2d 875, 876 (9th Cir. 1981). We affirm. * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying McAdams’s postjudgment motion for reconsideration because McAdams failed to demonstrate any basis for such relief. See id. (“The Tax Court’s denial of a motion for reconsideration will not be overturned on appeal absent a clear abuse of discretion.”); see also Abatti v. Comm’r, 859 F.2d 115, 118 (9th Cir. 1988) (a Tax Court cannot reopen a case after a final decision except in the event of fraud on the court or mutual mistake). We do not consider McAdams’s contentions regarding the Tax Court’s original decision because McAdams failed to file a timely notice of appeal as to that decision. See 26 U.S.C. § 7483 (notice of appeal must be filed within 90 days of judgment); Fed. R. App. P. 13(a)(1)(B); Tax Ct. R. 161, 162 (post-judgment motions for reconsideration or to vacate or revise a decision must be filed within 30 days of the decision); Nordvik v. Comm’r, 67 F.3d 1489, 1493 n. 5 (9th Cir. 1995) (“[S]uccessive motions asserting the same grounds cannot be tacked together to extend the time for filing an appeal.”). AFFIRMED. 2 20-72611

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.