Are Collection Due Process Hearings All Void?? Probably!

Posted on: January 8, 2012 by: admin

During my trial I found this:

“It follows that a collateral attack may be made here for “acts or orders [of administrative officers or agencies] which do not come clearly within the powers granted or which fall beyond the purview of the statute granting the agency or body its powers [such orders] are not merely erroneous, but are void.” * * * “They [officers or agencies] are without power to act contrary to the provisions of the law or the clear legislative intendment, or to exceed the authority conferred on them by statute.” 73 C.J.S. Public Administrative Bodies and Procedure § 59, pp. 383-384. And see, Liebhardt v. Tasher, 132 Colo. 554, 290 P.2d 1107.” [emphasis mine] Flavell v. Department Of Welfare, 355 P.2d 941, 943 (Colo. 1960).

If only some authority could be located saying this same thing to federal administrative agencies?? Agencies like the IRS. Yeah, yeah, I know

English: Anti-United States Internal Revenue S...

Naughty IRS: Destroying Due Process Rights in Due Process Hearings!

they are not an agency. I also know that some have contended IRS has never been established by law. Fact of the matter: everyone treats them like they are legitimate in the system. I went looking and found this little gem:

In the comparatively few cases in which such questions have arisen it has been distinctly recognized that administrative orders, quasi-judicial in character, are void if a hearing was denied; if that granted was inadequate or manifestly unfair; if the finding was contrary to the “indisputable character of the evidence.” Tang Tun v. Edsell, 223 U.S. 673, 681; Chin Yoh v. United States, 208 U.S. 8, 13; Low Wah Suey v. Backus, 225 U.S. 460, 468; Zakonaite v. Wolf, 226 U.S. 272; or, if the facts found do not, as a matter of law, support the order made. United States v. B. & O.S.W.R.R., 226 U.S. 14. Cf. Atlantic C.L. v. North Carolina Corp. Com., 206 U.S. 1, 20; Wisconsin, M. & P.R. Co. v. Jacobson, 179 U.S. 287, 301; 92#####92 Oregon Railroad v. Fairchild, 224 U.S. 510; I.C.C. v. Illinois Central, 215 U.S. 452, 470; Southern Pacific Co. v. Interstate Com. Comm., 219 U.S. 433; Muser v. Magone, 155 U.S. 240, 247. That quote is from Interstate Commerce Commission v. Louisville and Nashville Railroad Company, 227 U.S. 88, 91-2 (1913).

To me, this sounds like every single Collection Due Process Hearing the IRS ever held has been void for denial of due process. One of the reasons the IRS denies due process in Collection Due Process…they’re in a rush to move forward to levy. Look what the Court said about those who aid in the enforcement of a void order from Elliott v. Lessee of Piersol, 26 US 328, 340:

“Where a Court has jurisdiction, it has a right to decide every question which occurs in the cause; and whether its decision be correct or otherwise, its judgment, until reversed, is regarded as binding in every other Court. BUT, IF IT ACT WITHOUT AUTHORITY, ITS JUDGMENTS AND ORDERS ARE REGARDED AS NULLITIES. THEY ARE NOT VOIDABLE, BUT SIMPLY VOID; and form no bar to a recovery sought, even prior to a reversal, in opposition to them. They constitute no justification; and ALL PERSONS CONCERNED IN EXECUTING SUCH JUDGMENTS OR SENTENCES, ARE CONSIDERED, IN LAW, AS TRESPASSERS.” (emphasis added)

To me, that means that ALL IRS personnel who move forward on a levy based upon a void final determination issuing from a Collection Due Process Hearing are also trespassers.

I pasted this together from posts to my new Facebook page IRS Fight Club:

Enhanced by Zemanta
Be Sociable, Share!

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.