Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 8621331
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Chryson v. Estoll
No. 8621331 · Decided May 22, 2006
No. 8621331·Ninth Circuit · 2006·
FlawFinder last updated this page Apr. 2, 2026
Case Details
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided
May 22, 2006
Citation
No. 8621331
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
MEMORANDUM ** *770 Mark Chryson appeals pro se the from district court’s judgment dismissing for lack of subject matter jurisdiction his action challenging the Internal Revenue Service’s determination upholding the collection action of unpaid income taxes for tax year 1999. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo, Jerron West, Inc. v. Cal. State Bd. of Equalization, 129 F.3d 1334, 1337 (9th Cir. 1997), and we affirm. The district court properly dismissed Chryson’s action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction because the Tax Court has exclusive jurisdiction over an action seeking judicial review of a tax levy determination involving income taxes. See 26 U.S.C. § 6330 (d)(1) (providing the Tax Court with jurisdiction over an appeal from a tax levy determination when it has jurisdiction over the underlying tax liability); see also 26 C.F.R. § 6Q1.102(b)(l)(i) (providing the Tax Court with jurisdiction over assessed but unpaid income taxes). Chryson’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive. AFFIRMED. This disposition is not appropriate for publi *770 cation and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Plain English Summary
MEMORANDUM ** *770 Mark Chryson appeals pro se the from district court’s judgment dismissing for lack of subject matter jurisdiction his action challenging the Internal Revenue Service’s determination upholding the collection action of unpa
Key Points
01MEMORANDUM ** *770 Mark Chryson appeals pro se the from district court’s judgment dismissing for lack of subject matter jurisdiction his action challenging the Internal Revenue Service’s determination upholding the collection action of unpa
02The district court properly dismissed Chryson’s action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction because the Tax Court has exclusive jurisdiction over an action seeking judicial review of a tax levy determination involving income taxes.
03§ 6330 (d)(1) (providing the Tax Court with jurisdiction over an appeal from a tax levy determination when it has jurisdiction over the underlying tax liability); see also 26 C.F.R.
04§ 6Q1.102(b)(l)(i) (providing the Tax Court with jurisdiction over assessed but unpaid income taxes).
Frequently Asked Questions
MEMORANDUM ** *770 Mark Chryson appeals pro se the from district court’s judgment dismissing for lack of subject matter jurisdiction his action challenging the Internal Revenue Service’s determination upholding the collection action of unpa
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for Chryson v. Estoll in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on May 22, 2006.
Use the citation No. 8621331 and verify it against the official reporter before filing.