From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Chaney v. U.S.

United States District Court, S.D. Texas, Houston Division
Nov 27, 2000
Civil Action No. H-99-2184 (S.D. Tex. Nov. 27, 2000)

Opinion

Civil Action No. H-99-2184

November 27, 2000


ORDER


Pending before the Court is Plaintiff's motion for reconsideration (Dkt. # 15) and motion for enlargement of time instanter (Dkt. # 19). After considering the motions, response, reply, and applicable law, the Court is of the opinion that Plaintiff's motions should be DENIED.

Inspite of Plaintiff's protestations otherwise, Plaintiff is required to pay income taxes. See Davis v. United States, 742 F.2d 171, 172 (5th Cir. 1984); Lonsdale v. Commissioner, 661, F.2d 71, 72 (5th Cir. 1981). Plaintiff has already filed his motion for reconsideration and replied to Defendant's response. Consequently, the Court sees no reason to grant a further extension of time, especially since the law in this area is well established.

It is so ORDERED.


Summaries of

Chaney v. U.S.

United States District Court, S.D. Texas, Houston Division
Nov 27, 2000
Civil Action No. H-99-2184 (S.D. Tex. Nov. 27, 2000)
Case details for

Chaney v. U.S.

Case Details

Full title:NAREN ANDY CHANEY, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant

Court:United States District Court, S.D. Texas, Houston Division

Date published: Nov 27, 2000

Citations

Civil Action No. H-99-2184 (S.D. Tex. Nov. 27, 2000)