Clark v. Internal Revenue Service
| 1:2006cv00544 |
| October 4, 2006 |
| US District Court for the District of Hawaii |
| Hawaii Office |
| SAMUEL P KING |
| LESLIE E KOBAYASHI |
| Freedom of Information Act |
| 05 U.S.C. ยง 552 Freedom of Information Act |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
332
MEMORANDUM OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW. Signed by MARVIN E. ASPEN on 7/26/2011. ~ On December 16, 2010, we concluded a four-day bench trial on Plaintiff Mona Watson Clark's only remaining claim, Count V of her fi rst amended complaint. In Count V, Plaintiff alleged that the Defendant, the Internal Revenue Service , made unauthorized disclosures of tax return information pertaining to her great uncle's estate. Plaintiff is a beneficiary and the curr ent executor of the estate. *Based on our findings of fact, we conclude that Plaintiff failed to bring her claim within the time allotted by the applicable statute of limitations. Because the statute of limitations is jurisdictional, we have no juri sdiction to rule on the merits of Plaintiff's claim. In the event we have jurisdiction, we conclude that Plaintiff has failed to meet her burden of proof and judgment for the IRS is appropriate. Plaintiff's claim pursuant to 26 U.S.C. 7; 7431 is dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. All other claims having been resolved, this case is terminated. (ecs, )CERTIFICATE OF SERVICEParticipants registered to receive electronic notifi cations received this document electronically at the e-mail address listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF). Participants not registered to receive electronic notifications were served by first class mail on the date of this docket entry Modified on 7/26/2011: Mona Watson Clark (mona.watson.clark@gmail.com) was also served via nef (bcc) and through counsel. (ecs, ). Modified on 7/26/2011 (ecs, ).
|
|
Filing
331
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RECUSAL AND FOR RECONSIDERATION OF ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RECUSAL DATED APRIL 19, 2011 323 - Signed by CHIEF JUDGE SUSAN OKI MOLLWAY on 7/14/11. (emt, )CERTIFICATE OF SERVICEParticipants registered to receive electronic notifications received this document electronically at the e-mail address listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF). Participants not registered to receive electronic notifications were served by first class mai l on the date of this docket entry Modified on 7/14/2011 ~ A copy of this order has been served by first class mail to Mona Watson Clark at 4350 Kai Ikena Dr., Kalaheo, HI 96741, the addressed referenced on the docket sheet. (emt, ).
|
|
Filing
299
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: re 253 , 273 .. Signed by MARVIN E. ASPEN on 1/7/11. (eps ) -- ... finding no bad faith, or prejudice to Clark, under these circumstances and decline to sanction Defendants CERTIFICATE OF SERVICEParticipants registered to receive electronic notifications received this document electronically at the e-mail address listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF). Participants not registered to receive electronic notifications were served by first class mail on the date of this docket entry
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Hawaii District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
| Search for this case: Clark v. Internal Revenue Service | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
