Redondo v. United States
542 F. App'x 908
Fed. Cir.2013Background
- Domiciano Redondo filed a 2005 federal income tax return and paid the tax on April 15, 2006. He filed an amended 2005 return seeking a refund on June 28, 2010.
- The IRS denied the refund as untimely on August 12, 2010; Redondo appealed and submitted medical evidence asserting a "financial disability" due to Meniere’s disease and clinical depression.
- Submitted evidence included two letters from Dr. Murray A. Kimmel and a lay statement from friends describing assistance from late 2005 through 2009.
- The IRS Appeals Office denied the refund claim on April 25, 2011; Redondo sued in the Court of Federal Claims on August 6, 2012.
- The Court of Federal Claims dismissed for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, finding Redondo failed to meet the statutory and Revenue Procedure 99-21 requirements to establish a financial disability and, alternatively, that any tolling would have ended by December 31, 2006, leaving the claim untimely.
- The Federal Circuit affirmed, concluding the evidence did not satisfy Rev. Proc. 99-21 and that equitable tolling is unavailable under § 6511.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Redondo's refund claim was timely under 26 U.S.C. § 6511 | Redondo argued his refund was timely if statute was tolled due to financial disability from his medical condition | Government argued the claim was filed after § 6511 deadlines and not tolled because disability not established per IRS requirements | Held: Claim untimely; filed June 28, 2010, after applicable deadline (April 15, 2009 or tolling adjustment) |
| Whether Redondo established "financial disability" under § 6511(h) and Rev. Proc. 99-21 | Redondo contended his Meniere’s disease and depression prevented managing finances and tolled the limitations period | Government argued submitted evidence failed to meet Rev. Proc. 99-21 (physician statement specifying prevention, duration, and signed certification) | Held: Not established — physician letters lacked required explicit "prevented" language, specific time period, and required certification; lay statements insufficient |
| Whether court could equitably toll § 6511 for reasons other than financial disability | Redondo sought tolling based on illness and other circumstances (FINRA litigation referenced) | Government relied on Supreme Court precedent barring equitable tolling of § 6511 outside statutory financial disability | Held: Equitable tolling unavailable; FINRA litigation irrelevant and not shown to create financial disability |
Key Cases Cited
- Ferreiro v. United States, 350 F.3d 1318 (Fed. Cir.) (standard of review for dismissal and factual findings)
- Keener v. United States, 551 F.3d 1358 (Fed. Cir.) (plaintiff bears burden to establish jurisdiction)
- Henke v. United States, 60 F.3d 795 (Fed. Cir.) (pleading standard on a jurisdictional motion to dismiss)
- United States v. Brockamp, 519 U.S. 347 (Supreme Court) ( § 6511 time limits cannot be equitably tolled)