Menu
Tax Notes logo

Ninth Circuit Dismisses Appeal, Finding No Order in the Court

JUN. 20, 2018

Brayshaw, Nora v. United States

DATED JUN. 20, 2018
DOCUMENT ATTRIBUTES
  • Case Name
    United States v. Nora Brayshaw
  • Court
    United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
  • Docket
    No. 17-16327
  • Judge
    Per Curiam
  • Parallel Citation
    727 Fed. Appx. 407
    2018 WL 3045202
  • Code Sections
  • Subject Area/Tax Topics
  • Jurisdictions
  • Tax Analysts Document Number
    2018-25709
  • Tax Analysts Electronic Citation
    2018 TNT 121-25

Brayshaw, Nora v. United States

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Petitioner-Appellee,
v.
NORA BRAYSHAW,
Respondent-Appellant.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

D.C. No. 2:14-mc-00088-MCE-KJN

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California
Morrison C. England, Jr., District Judge, Presiding

Submitted June 12, 2018**

Before: RAWLINSON, CLIFTON, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.

Taxpayer Nora Brayshaw appeals from a clerk order entered in the district court following an order to show cause hearing arising from the district court's orders enforcing an Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) summons to produce documents and records related to her and her husband's tax liability for 2002 to 2012. This court has an obligation to review whether appellate jurisdiction exists for this appeal. Breed v. Hughes Aircraft Co., 253 F.3d 1173, 1177 (9th Cir. 2001). We dismiss for lack of appellate jurisdiction.

We do not have jurisdiction to hear this appeal because the district court did not enter, either during or after the order to show cause hearing, an order holding Brayshaw in contempt or an order modifying its prior, final enforcement order. See 28 U.S.C. § 1291; Couch v. Telescope Inc., 611 F.3d 629, 632 (9th Cir. 2010) (“[P]arties may appeal only from orders which end the litigation on the merits and leave nothing for the court to do but execute the judgment.” (citation, alterations, and internal quotation marks omitted)).

DISMISSED.

FOOTNOTES

*This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

**The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

END FOOTNOTES

DOCUMENT ATTRIBUTES
  • Case Name
    United States v. Nora Brayshaw
  • Court
    United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
  • Docket
    No. 17-16327
  • Judge
    Per Curiam
  • Parallel Citation
    727 Fed. Appx. 407
    2018 WL 3045202
  • Code Sections
  • Subject Area/Tax Topics
  • Jurisdictions
  • Tax Analysts Document Number
    2018-25709
  • Tax Analysts Electronic Citation
    2018 TNT 121-25
Copy RID