Summary
recognizing that failure to respond to show cause order waives arguments in opposition
Summary of this case from Griggs v. Kenworth of Montgomery, Inc.Opinion
No. 10-12434 Non-Argument Calendar.
October 14, 2010.
Carol Barthel, Brian H. Corcoran, Department of Justice, Tax Division, Washington, DC, Darcy F. Coty, Lawrence R. Sommerfeld, Sally Yates, U.S. Attorney's Office, Atlanta, GA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Anthony J. Rollins, Wagner, Johnston Rosenthal, P.C., Atlanta, GA, for Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia. D.C. Docket No. 1:10-cv-00759-CAP.
Before CARNES, MARCUS and COX, Circuit Judges.
The district court granted the Government's petition to enforce Internal Revenue summonses, and the Defendant Thomas J. Lawler appeals.
Lawler presents two arguments on this appeal. He contends: (1) that the court erred in concluding that he waived his right to assert defenses by his failure to timely assert them in response to the Magistrate Judge's show cause order; and (2) that prior court approval was required for administrative issuance of these summonses.
We find no error in the district court's conclusion that Lawler's failure to substantively object and respond to the petition waived defenses. This waiver forecloses Lawler's second argument. As a general rule, we will not consider a legal issue or theory raised for the first time on appeal. United States v. Tremble, 933 F.2d 925, 928 (11th Cir. 1991). None of the exceptions to the general rule are applicable here.
AFFIRMED.