0 Bewertungen0% fanden dieses Dokument nützlich (0 Abstimmungen)
46 Ansichten4 Seiten
A certified copy of the judgment and a copy of this court's opinion are hereby issued as the mandate of this court. If noted above, the judgment form is also being mailed to counsel and pro se parties.
A certified copy of the judgment and a copy of this court's opinion are hereby issued as the mandate of this court. If noted above, the judgment form is also being mailed to counsel and pro se parties.
Copyright:
Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
Verfügbare Formate
Als PDF, TXT herunterladen oder online auf Scribd lesen
A certified copy of the judgment and a copy of this court's opinion are hereby issued as the mandate of this court. If noted above, the judgment form is also being mailed to counsel and pro se parties.
Copyright:
Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
Verfügbare Formate
Als PDF, TXT herunterladen oder online auf Scribd lesen
ELBERT PARR TUTTLE COURT OF APPEALS BUILDING 56 Forsyth Street, N.W. AtJanta t Georgi. 30)03 John Ley For rules and forms visit RECENEQ Clerk of Coun DEC D cember 14,2010 United States Dis 75 Spring Street SW, Room 2211 Atlanta, GA 30303-3361 Appeal Number: 10-12434-EE Case Style: USA v. Thomas Lawler District Court Docket No: 1 :10-cv-00759-CAP The enclosed certified copy of the judgment and a copy of this court's opinion are hereby issued as the mandate of this court. Also enclosed are the following: Original record on appeal or review, consisting of: two volumes The clerk of the court or agency shown above is requested to acknow ledge receipt on the copy of this letter enclosed to the clerk. A copy of this letter, and the judgment form if noted above, but not a copy of the court's decision, is also being mailed to counsel and pro se parties. A copy of the court's decision was previously mailed to counsel and pro se parties on the date it was issued. Sincerely, JOHN LEY, Clerk of Court Reply to: James O. Delaney Phone #: 404-335-6113 Enclosure(s) MDT-1 Letter Issuing Mandate Case 1:10-cv-00759-CAP Document 42 Filed 12/16/10 Page 1 of 4 FlED IN CI.ERK'S OFFICE U.S.Q.C. Atlanta UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS DEC 1 6 2010 For the Eleventh Circuit No. 10-12434 fiLED District Court Docket No. 1:10-cv-00759-CAP U.S. COURT OF APPEALS ELEVENTH CIRCUIT OCTOBER 14,2010 JOHN LEY USA, CLERK Plaintiff - Appellee, versus THOMAS J. LAWLER, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia JUDGMENT It is hereby ordered, adjudged, and decreed that the attached opinion included herein by reference, is entered as the judgment ofthis Court. Entered: October 14, 2010 For the Court: John Ley. Clerk of Court DEC 1 4 2010 By: Djuanna H. Clark Case 1:10-cv-00759-CAP Document 42 Filed 12/16/10 Page 2 of 4 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT.--______--, ELEVENTH CIRCUIT No. 10-12434 OCTOBER 14,2010 Non-Argument Calendar JOHN LEY CLERK OF D.C. Docket No.1: 10-cv-00759-CAP UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus THOMAS J. LA WLER, Defendant -Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia ( October 14, 2010) Before CARNES, MARCUS and COX, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: The district court granted the Government's petition to enforce Internal Revenue summonses, and the Defendant Thomas J. Lawler appeals. Case 1:10-cv-00759-CAP Document 42 Filed 12/16/10 Page 3 of 4 Lawler presents two arguments on this appeal. He contends: (1) that the court erred in concluding that he waived his right to assert defenses by his failure to timely assert them in response to the Magistrate Judge's show cause order; and (2) that prior court approval was required for administrative issuance of these summonses. We find no error in the district court's conclusion that Lawler's failure to substantively object and respond to the petition waived defenses. This waiver forecloses Lawler's second argument. As a general rule, we will not consider a legal issue or theory raised for the first time on appeal. United States v. Tremble, 933 F.2d 925,928 (llth Cir 1991). None of the exceptions to the general rule are applicable here. AFFIRMED. 2 Case 1:10-cv-00759-CAP Document 42 Filed 12/16/10 Page 4 of 4