From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mulder v. C.I.R

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
Dec 6, 1988
861 F.2d 1333 (5th Cir. 1988)

Opinion

No. 87-4810.

December 6, 1988.

Merle R. Flagg, Dallas, Tex., for petitioners-appellants.

William F. Nelson, Chief Counsel, I.R.S., Michael L. Paup, Chief Appellate Sec. Tax Div., Dept. of Justice, Doris D. Coles, Gary R. Allen, Acting Chief, William S. Rose, Acting Asst. Atty. Gen., Janet Kay Jones, Richard Farber, John A. Dudeck, Jr., Roger M. Olsen, Asst. Chief, Washington, D.C., for respondent-appellee.

Appeal from the Decision of the United States Tax Court.

Before WISDOM, REAVLEY and POLITZ, Circuit Judges.


ON PETITION FOR REHEARING [2] (Opinion Sept. 19, 5th Cir. 1988, 855 F.2d 208)


The petition for rehearing correctly notes that the record in this cause does not show that the notice of deficiency was sent by certified mail with a return receipt requested. The record is silent about a return receipt; the references to such in our opinion should be deleted. Having reconsidered the appeal in light of this factual correction, we reach the same conclusion and reconfirm our earlier ruling. The petition for rehearing is DENIED.


Summaries of

Mulder v. C.I.R

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
Dec 6, 1988
861 F.2d 1333 (5th Cir. 1988)
Case details for

Mulder v. C.I.R

Case Details

Full title:JERRY W. AND JEANETTE MULDER, PETITIONERS-APPELLANTS, v. COMMISSIONER OF…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit

Date published: Dec 6, 1988

Citations

861 F.2d 1333 (5th Cir. 1988)

Citing Cases

Gibraltar Sav. v. Ldbrinkman Corp.

These factual corrections do not affect the result. See, e.g., Mulder v. Commissioner, 861 F.2d 1333 (5th…