Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Miller v. United States

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS, SEVENTH CIRCUIT.


October 8, 1976

GEORGE A. MILLER, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT
v.
U.S. ET AL., DEFENDANTS-APPELLEES.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana, South Bend Division. No. S75-65, Robert A. Grant, Judge.

Before Walter J. CUMMINGS, Robert A. SPRECHER, Philip W. TONE, Circuit Judges.

Order

Plaintiff-appellant, George A. Miller, seeking declaratory and injunctive relief, requested that a three-judge court be convened pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 2282 and 2284 on the grounds that the federal income tax system, the monetary system, the procedures of the Internal Revenue Service, and the portion of Declaratory Judgment Act which prevents declaratory judgments with respect to taxes, are unconstitutional. Plaintiff also sought to enjoin the enforcement of the minimal sanctions of the Internal Revenue Code §§ 7201 and 7207, statutes authorizing the use of legal tender other than gold and silver coin, all regulations of the Secretary of the Treasury and the assessment and collection of income taxes against him on constitutional grounds. Finally, he sought a declaration that the fifth amendment right against self-incrimination allowed him to refuse answering the questions on his income tax forms. Plaintiff named as defendants, United States of America, Edward Levi, William G. Simon and James W. Caldwell. The district court denied the request for convening a three-judge court since plaintiff failed to present a substantial constitutional question over which a three-judge court would have subject matter jurisdiction. The court also dismissed the suit on the grounds that the United States was the real party in interest and had not consented to be sued, that the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction, and the complaint failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. Plaintiff now appeals. On the record and briefs, without oral argument, we affirm and adopt the district court's order and supporting memorandum, attached hereto, as our own.

Judgment Affirmed.

19761008

© 1998 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.