NOLL v. LODGE

Full title: CLIFFORD L. NOLL, Petitioner, v. EDWARD J. LODGE, Respondent

Court: United States District Court, D. Idaho

Date published: Jun 27, 2002

Case No. CV02-0087-N-BLW (D. Idaho Jun. 27, 2002)

Opinion

Case No. CV02-0087-N-BLW.

June 27, 2002

ORDER

B. LYNN WINMILL, Chief Judge, District

This case was reassigned to this Court to consider whether Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is subject to summary dismissal. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2243, the Court now reviews the Petition to determine whether it is appropriate to issue an order to Respondent to show cause why the relief sought in the Petition should not be granted.

Title 28 U.S.C. § 2243 requires a federal court to dismiss a habeas corpus action where it appears from the petition that the petitioner is not entitled to relief. In this matter, it appears that Petitioner has been the subject of tax collection efforts by the United States Internal Revenue Service (IRS) for several years. Petitioner and his wife have filed various federal court actions to assert that they do no owe the taxes, that the IRS has no authority to collect taxes, and various other claims which have been unsuccessful.¹ Here, Petitioner asserts that Judge Lodge has deprived him of property without due process by failing to allow his various lawsuits to proceed. The Petition admits that Petitioner is not in custody.

1 See Noll v. Peterson, CV01-002, dismissed 9/21/01, appeal dismissed 3/12/02; Noll v. United States, 165 F.3d 916 (9^th Cir. 1998) (CV97-145) (imposing a $2,000 sanction for filing a frivolous appeal); Noll v. United States, CV99-590. This is by no means an exhaustive list.

Petitioner's Petition fails to state the essential elements required for a habeas corpus action as set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 2241, et seq. For example, Petitioner is not being held in illegal detention, confinement or custody, by Judge Lodge or anyone else. Accordingly, issuance of a writ of habeas corpus would not be an appropriate remedy.

Rather, it is clear that Petitioner is attempting to again bring his taxation claims in an inappropriate manner. The subject of the Petition is recovery of personal and real property, which is not a proper subject in a habeas corpus proceeding. A review of the allegations in this matter and Petitioner's previous filings convinces the Court that amendment or conversion in this action would be futile. As a result, this action shall be dismissed.

ORDER

NOW THEREFORE IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Docket No. 1) is DISMISSED.