Thomas Ryther v. United States
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Thomas L. Ryther appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment for the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) in his action seeking a refund of trust-fund recovery penalties imposed under 26 U.S.C. § 6672 . We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo. Buffalow v. United States, 109 F.3d 570, 572 (9th Cir.1997). We affirm.
The district court properly granted summary judgment for the IRS on Ryther’s refund claims because Ryther failed to establish a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether he was a “responsible person” at Knight Steel who acted willfully in failing to collect or pay over withheld trust-fund taxes. Purcell v. United States, 1 F.3d 932, 936-38 (9th Cir.1993) (discussing “responsible person” and “willfulness” elements required for imposition of personal liability under § 6672).
The district court properly granted summary judgment for the IRS on its counter claim to reduce the unpaid assessments to judgment because the IRS introduced evidence of the assessments, and Ryther failed to present sufficient evidence to refute the presumption of their validity. See Oliver v. United States, 921 F.2d 916, 919-20 (9th Cir.1990)…