DiAndrea v. United States
United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
968 F.2d 1049 (1992)
- Written by Daniel Clark, JD
Facts
Anthony DiAndrea (plaintiff) owned Metro Denver Maintenance Cleaning, Inc. (Metro) (plaintiff), a janitorial-services company. An Internal Revenue Service (IRS) agent auditing DiAndrea’s and Metro’s tax returns suspected tax fraud and referred the matter to the IRS’s criminal-investigations unit. The IRS investigators sought to reconcile discrepancies between DiAndrea’s and Metro’s financial statements and the information reported on their tax returns. One such discrepancy was that DiAndrea’s lifestyle appeared unsupportable based on his reported income. The investigators did not suspect DiAndrea or Metro of concealing cash payments. An IRS investigator circulated a letter to Metro’s customers seeking information concerning any payments, including cash payments, made to Metro. The letter disclosed facts such as Metro’s address, the existence of a criminal tax investigation, and the IRS’s knowledge of transactions between the recipients and Metro. The IRS investigators eventually resolved all discrepancies using only Metro’s and DiAndrea’s bank records. These records revealed that DiAndrea’s inflated lifestyle was explained by undisclosed money-market accounts into which he had received some undisclosed cash payments. The payments were too low to pursue prosecution, and the investigation was closed. DiAndrea and Metro then sued the United States (defendant), claiming that the IRS had disclosed confidential tax-return information in violation of § 6103 of the Internal Revenue Code (code) with the letter to Metro’s customers. The district court awarded damages to Metro. The district court’s opinion focused on the IRS’s lack of evidence of undisclosed cash payments before disclosing Metro’s tax-return information to its customers in the IRS’s letter. The government appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Ebel, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 810,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.