Johnson v. United States

99-1 U.S.T.C. ¶ 50,463 (1999)

From our private database of 46,500+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Johnson v. United States

United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia
99-1 U.S.T.C. ¶ 50,463 (1999)

Facts

The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) assessed tax deficiencies against William and Linda Johnson (plaintiffs) for 1981 through 1983. The Johnsons claimed tax overpayments for 1988 through 1990, which the IRS applied to the Johnsons’ 1981 and 1982 assessments. In December 1993, the IRS issued deficiency notices to the Johnsons for 1981 through 1983, which the Johnsons challenged in February 1994 in the United States Tax Court. The Johnsons’ Tax Court petition alleged, among other things, that the IRS’s December 2, 1993, collection notice to them was improper. After engaging in extensive discovery and litigation before the Tax Court, on July 12, 1994, the Tax Court granted the parties’ request for an order stating that the Johnsons neither owed any tax for 1981 through 1983 nor overpaid their taxes for those years. On July 11, 1996, the Johnsons sued the United States (defendant), alleging that the IRS engaged in unauthorized tax-collection actions in violation of Internal Revenue Code (code) § 7433. Specifically, the Johnsons cited IRS actions regarding the assessment and determination of tax that the Johnsons purportedly owed and certain IRS notice and demand actions. All the IRS’s alleged § 7433 violations, including the IRS’s purportedly wrongful December 1993 and January 1994 collection notices, occurred before March 21, 1994. The United States moved for summary judgment, arguing that § 7433’s two-year statute of limitations expired no later than March 21, 1996. The Johnsons responded that their § 7433 claim did not accrue—and thus the limitations period did not commence—until the Tax Court’s July 12, 1994, order because all the essential elements of their claim did not exist until then.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Forrester, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 832,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 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.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,500 briefs - keyed to 994 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership