I’ll borrow a wee bit N’Awlins flavor as I mention Ch J Kathleen (“TBS = The Big Shillelagh”) Kerrigan’s curb-kick of Oakbrook Land Holdings, LLC, William Duane Horton, Tax Matters Partner, Docket No. 5444-13, filed 8/20/24.

Yes, dat (sorry, that) Oakbrook, the one where “Highly Contestable” got brushhogged via Valley Park Ranch. See my blogpost “‘Highly Contestable’ Gets Brushhogged,” 3/28/24, for the skinny.

Well, looks like the Oakbrook crowd read either Valley Park Ranch or my blogpost (or both), because ninety (count ”em, ninety) days later, they moved for reconsideration, claiming change in law. Ch J TBS says they mean Rule 162 vacation, but mox nix, whatever they want, they’re not getting it. The Supremes denied cert after 6 Cir affirmed IRS a year before this motion, so Valley Park Ranch has ridden off into the sunset.

“Except for very limited exceptions, this Court lacks jurisdiction once a decision becomes final within the meaning of section 7481. As relevant here, a decision of the Tax Court becomes final upon the denial of a petition for certiorari, if the decision of the Tax Court has been affirmed or the appeal dismissed by the United States Court of Appeals. See §7481(a)(2)(B).” Order, at pp. 1-2. (Footnote and citations omitted, but see infra, as my expensive colleagues would say, for the footnote).

“As a general rule, the finality of a decision is absolute, with the few following exceptions: (1) where there was fraud on the Court, (2) where the Court never acquired jurisdiction to make a decision, and (3) where the Court discovered a clerical error after the decision had become final.” Order, at p. 1, footnote 2. (Citations omitted).

Just as important is 6 Cir’s mandate; and a mandate is what the appellate court told the lower court to do. 6 Cir affirmed Tax Court’s decision.

And as we’ve seen again and again,  when mandate is on the menu, “(T)hat court cannot vary it, or examine it for any other purpose than execution; or give any other or further relief; or review it, even for apparent error, upon any matter decided on appeal; or intermeddle with it, further than to settle so much as has been remanded.” In re Sanford Fork & Tool Co., 160 U.S. 247 (1895), at p. 255.