Justia U.S. 10th Circuit Court of Appeals Opinion Summaries

Defendant Catherine Senninger was convicted on six counts of mail fraud and one count of making a false claim against the Government. She was acquitted on several other counts, including conspiracy and additional mail fraud counts. At trial, the Government presented evidence that Defendant, through her involvement with Olympia Financial and Tax Services, participated in a scheme to defraud the Internal Revenue Service and the Colorado Department of Revenue by preparing false tax returns. Defendant was sentenced to 36 months' imprisonment, which was an upward departure from the advisory guidelines range. Defendant challenged her sentence and subsequent restitution order. Upon review, the Tenth Circuit found the district court "properly rejected" Defendant's arguments. Accordingly, the Court affirmed Defendant's sentence.

"The Dawses' struggle with the IRS has a lengthy provenance." Decades ago, Donald and Phyllis Dawes pled guilty for failing to file their 1981 through 1983 tax returns. They also failed to pay their taxes from 1986 through 1988, and 1990. All this led to the IRS to seek and win a declaratory judgment that the Dawses fraudulently conveyed certain assets in an effort to avoid their creditors and that those conveyances were null and void. The IRS proceeded to execute this judgment to take possession of these assets, but before it could do so, the Dawses filed for Chapter 12 bankruptcy protection. "And that brings us to the latest installment of this epic": with permission of the bankruptcy court, the Dawses sold several tracts of land. The sale created income tax liabilities. The Dawses submitted a bankruptcy reorganization plan in which they proposed to treat their newly incurred tax liabilities as general unsecured claims. The IRS opposed the plan "vigorously" but was unsuccessful at the bankruptcy and federal district court. The IRS brought its complaint to the Tenth Circuit, asking to "undo its earlier losses." Upon careful consideration of the lengthy record below, the Tenth Circuit found that the taxes at issue here were incurred by the Dawses after they petitioned for bankruptcy. "So it is that the Dawses must pay the tax collector his due." The post-petition income tax liabilities at issue were not eligible for treatment as unsecured claims under the Bankruptcy Code. The Tenth Circuit reversed the lower courts’ decisions and remanded the case for further proceedings.

The Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) appealed a Tax Court decision that granted summary judgment in favor of Salman Ranch, Ltd. The Partnership owned a ranch in New Mexico. The Partners individually entered into short sales involving United States Treasury Notes. With the cash proceeds from the sales, the partners satisfied some debt obligations and bought replacement bonds. In 1999, the Partnership increased its basis in the ranch to reflect proceeds from the short sales. However, they did not account for the offset obligation used to close the short sales. The IRS eventually determined these transactions artificially inflated the Partnership's basis in the ranch. The IRS issued Notices of Final Partnership Administrative Adjustments (FPAAs) to adjust the Partnership's 1999, 2001 and 2002 tax returns to correct for the alleged overstatement of basis. The FPAAs were issued more than three but fewer than six years after the returns were first filed. The Partnership challenged the FPAAs, arguing that they were issued outside the statute of limitations. The Court of Federal Claims found in favor of the IRS. The Federal Circuit Court reversed. Upon careful consideration of the arguments and the applicable legal authority, the Tenth Circuit reversed the district court's decision. The Court concluded that the statute of limitations had not run on the 2001 or 2002 FPAAs. The Court remanded the case to the tax court for further proceedings.

Defendant Manikhone Saignaphone pled guilty to conspiracy to defraud the government. The district court sentenced her to 26 monthsâ imprisonment. Defendant appealed the sentence, arguing that her sentence was unreasonable in light of the lesser sentences given to her co-conspirators. The Tenth Circuit reviewed the record and found that Defendant failed to overcome the presumption that her sentence was unreasonable. Accordingly, the Court affirmed the lower courtâs decision and Defendantâs sentence.