Linn v. Chivatero, 85-3563
| Court | United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (5th Circuit) |
| Citation | 790 F.2d 1270 |
| Docket Number | No. 85-3563,85-3563 |
| Parties | -5118, 86-1 USTC P 9474 Kenneth H. LINN, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Jack CHIVATERO, etc., et al., Defendants-Appellees. |
| Decision Date | 06 June 1986 |
Page 1270
v.
Jack CHIVATERO, etc., et al., Defendants-Appellees.
Fifth Circuit.
Page 1271
Robert I. White, Houston, Tex., for plaintiffs-appellants.
Gayle P. Miller, Glenn L. Archer, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., Tax Div., U.S. Dept. of Justice, Washington, D.C., Robert E. Lindsay, Roger M. Olsen, Acting Asst. Atty. Gen., Washington, D.C., for defendants-appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana.
Before CLARK, Chief Judge, JOLLY and HILL, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
John Stassi appeals the district court's denial of his request for attorney's fees and costs. We reverse.
I.
In January, 1982, Internal Revenue Service Agent Wigginton issued an IRS summons to taxpayer Linn requiring production of certain corporate records. Linn's counsel, John Stassi, sent a messenger to deliver the documents. By mistake, both corporate and personal records were delivered. Stassi immediately informed Wigginton that only the corporate documents were responsive to the summons, that Linn's Fifth Amendment privilege was asserted with regard to the personal records and that he was on his way to pick up the records. When Stassi arrived, he and Agent Wigginton agreed to inventory the personal records and separate the corporate from the personal records on the following day. Instead, Wigginton worked until after midnight copying as many of the documents as she could. The next day Stassi and Wigginton segregated the documents into groups that were "responsive," "non-responsive" and "disputed."
When the IRS refused to return the disputed documents or any of the copies made, Linn and Stassi filed an action alleging violation of Linn's Fourth and Fifth Amendment rights and seeking a return of all of the originals and all disputed documents and copies along with an injunction against use of the information gathered from them. Stassi agreed to bear the costs of such suit since he was responsible for the oversight. The district court determined that the Anti-Injunction Act, 26 U.S.C. Sec. 7421(a), deprived it of jurisdiction to hear the complaint because the constitutional violations occurred incident to an IRS investigation.
On appeal, this Court held that the district court did have jurisdiction but declined to decide the constitutional issues. Linn v. Chivatero, 714 F.2d 1278 (5th Cir.1983). Two members of the panel based their holding on the inapplicability of the Anti-Injunction Act to Fourth Amendment claims. The other panel member found the Act applicable but determined that the case fell within the judicially-created exception to the Act set out in Enochs v. Williams
Page 1272
Packing & Navigation Co., 370 U.S. 1, 82 S.Ct. 1125, 8 L.Ed.2d 292 (1962).Upon remand, the government declined to litigate further and judgment was entered pursuant to the government's motion to dismiss. Stassi then requested attorney's fees and costs under the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2412(a) and (d). The district judge denied this request because he found that there was substantial justification for the government's position. Costs were also denied on the basis that Stassi and Linn were not "prevailing" parties since the court had not reached a decision on the merits. Stassi appeals the denial of attorney's fees and costs.
II.
Before it was amended in 1985, the Equal Access to Justice Act provided for an award of attorney's...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Lyons Sav. and Loan Ass'n v. Westside Bancorporation, Inc., 86-1793
...parallel litigation had been terminated, and would therefore constitute a "restraint" within the scope of the statute. 756 F.2d at 1102; 790 F.2d at 1270. The Fifth Circuit essentially found any kind of judicial interference with the FSLIC's duties as receiver when liquidating a failed inst......
-
Baker v. Bowen, s. 86-1620
...to attorney's fees for all time spent in federal court on the prevailing issues both before and after remand. See Linn v. Chivatero, 790 F.2d 1270 (5th Cir.1986); Brown v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, 747 F.2d 878 (5th Cir.1984); McGill v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, ......
-
Mearkle v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue, Docket No. 28428-84.
...by the court, or(ii) by agreement of the parties. 7 That respondent moved to dismiss did not prevent a fee award in Linn v. Chivatero, 790 F.2d 1270 (5th Cir. 1986). Likewise, we will not allow it to suffice here to prevent an award. 8 See also Engle v. Commissioner, 76 T.C. 915, 943 n. 8 (......
-
Federal Sav. and Loan Ins. Corp. v. Bonfanti, 87-3012
...of claims outside the statutory reorganization process" is a "restraint" within the scope of section 1464 and thus is to be avoided. 790 F.2d at 1270 (citing Hudspeth, 756 F.2d at To restate yet again, upon the appointment of a receiver, herein the FSLIC, Page 1394 all claims against the in......