Sibbrel

United States v. Sibbrel

Good Law
81 F. App'x 914
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 20, 2003No. 02-56247California649 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Chapman Mechanical, Inc. (“Chapman”) faded to pay to the IRS its employees’ federal withholding taxes for the fourth quarter of 1994 and the first quarter of 1995. The Government brought this civil action against Richard Sibbrel (“Sibbrel”). It asserted that he was a “responsible person” at Chapman within the meaning of 26 U.S.C. § 6672 and sought to reduce to judgment its assessment of “trust fund” recovery penalties against him. Following a two-day bench trial, the district court made oral findings of fact and conclusions of law, entered judgment for Sibbrel, and awarded him attorneys’ fees and litigation costs under 26 U.S.C. § 7430 . A panel of this Court reversed by memorandum disposition, United States v. Chapman, 7 Fed.Appx. 804 (9th Cir.2001). The panel concluded “that the district court’s finding that Sibbrel was not a ‘responsible person’ derives from the use of improper legal standards.” Id. at 806 .

On remand, the parties stipulated to use the prior trial transcript and the documentary evidence admitted in that trial as if the case had been tried de novo. Thereafter, the district court issued lengthy and thorough written findings of fact and conclusions…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.