889 F.3d 1200
11th Cir.2018Background
- The United States sued Estelle Stein to reduce federal income tax assessments, penalties, and interest for five years and moved for summary judgment with tax returns, account transcripts, and an IRS officer affidavit.
- Stein filed a self‑serving affidavit asserting, "to the best of [her] recollection," that she had paid the assessed amounts but conceded she lacked bank records or other documentary corroboration.
- The district court granted summary judgment for the government, holding Stein failed to rebut the presumption of correctness attaching to timely IRS assessments because she produced no documenting evidence of payment.
- A three‑judge Eleventh Circuit panel originally affirmed relying on Mays v. United States, which treated uncorroborated taxpayer affidavits as insufficient to defeat summary judgment.
- The en banc Eleventh Circuit overruled Mays in United States v. Stein, holding that a non‑conclusory affidavit complying with Rule 56 can create a genuine dispute even if self‑serving or uncorroborated, though such affidavits will not always preclude summary judgment.
- On remand, the government advanced new arguments (e.g., that Stein must show funds were actually delivered to the IRS) that the district court never considered; the panel declined to address those arguments and vacated and remanded for further proceedings consistent with the en banc decision.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a taxpayer's uncorroborated affidavit can create a genuine issue of material fact to avoid summary judgment on tax assessments | Stein: her affidavit asserting payment creates a triable issue despite lack of bank records | Government: uncorroborated, self‑serving affidavit insufficient; taxpayer must show funds were actually delivered | En banc: a non‑conclusory affidavit complying with Rule 56 can create a genuine dispute even if self‑serving/uncorroborated; remand for district court to consider new arguments in first instance |
| Whether earlier panel precedent (Mays) bars consideration of self‑serving affidavits | Stein: Mays should not preclude admissible affidavits from creating disputes | Government (earlier): relied on Mays to argue affidavits insufficient | En banc: overruled Mays; panel vacated prior summary judgment and remanded |
| Whether appellate court may consider new arguments not raised below | Stein: district court should be first to consider factual/legal issues | Government: raised new arguments on remand to support summary judgment | Panel: appellate court will not decide issues district court never had chance to examine; vacated and remanded |
| Whether substantive tax law requires corroboration of taxpayer affidavits | Stein: affidavit sufficient absent specific corroboration rule | Government: contended corroboration (actual delivery proof) required | En banc: left open; did not decide whether substantive tax law requires corroboration |
Key Cases Cited
- Mays v. United States, 763 F.2d 1295 (11th Cir. 1985) (previously held uncorroborated taxpayer affidavits insufficient to rebut IRS assessments)
- United States v. Stein, 840 F.3d 1355 (11th Cir. 2016) (panel opinion affirming summary judgment)
- United States v. Stein, 881 F.3d 853 (11th Cir. 2018) (en banc opinion overruling Mays and holding non‑conclusory self‑serving affidavits can create genuine disputes)
- Access Now, Inc. v. Sw. Airlines Co., 385 F.3d 1324 (11th Cir. 2004) (appellate courts should not decide issues the district court never had the opportunity to consider)
- Irving v. Mazda Motor Corp., 136 F.3d 764 (11th Cir. 1998) (noting district courts complain when appellate opinions address matters not argued below)