United States v. Milotinka Genov
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Appellant Milotinka Genov appeals the district court’s grant of summary judg ment to the United States in this action by the IRS to reduce to judgment Genov’s tax liabilities for 1995 and 1996. Genov argues that summary judgment was improperly granted because a genuine issue of material fact exists as to whether the IRS assessed her 1995 and 1996 tax liabilities in a timely manner, pursuant to 26 U.S.C. §§ 6501 (a), 6503(a). We agree.
While Form 4340 Certificates are sufficient to establish that assessments were properly made in the absence of contrary evidence, Hughes v. United States, 953 F.2d 531, 540 (9th Cir.1992), they are not necessarily conclusive, Farr v. United States, 990 F.2d 451, 454 (9th Cir.1993).
Unlike the litigants in Koff v. United States, 3 F.3d 1297, 1298 (9th Cir.1993), and Hansen v. United States, 7 F.3d 137, 138 (9th Cir.1993), Genov has produced sufficient contrary evidence to rebut the Form 4340 Certificates. First, an IRS agent twice promised but failed to deliver the requested assessments, without any explanation. The United States stresses that we must presume that government employees act correctly and in good faith. We find this…