From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Emigrant Savings Bank v. Parker

Supreme Court, Special Term, Kings County
Jul 14, 1975
85 Misc. 2d 22 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1975)

Opinion

July 14, 1975

Weiss Tucker for plaintiff.

Milton Zeiberg for Leonard E. Parker, defendant.


In these surplus money proceedings, the defendant United States moves to confirm the referee's report and for an order directing distribution in accordance therewith. The defendant mortgagor opposes on the ground the proposed distribution to the United States on account of its tax claims is barred by the applicable Statute of Limitations.

The pertinent part of the United States Code (US Code, tit 26, § 6502) provides as follows:

"(a) Length of period.

"Where the assessment of any tax imposed by this title has been made within the period of limitation properly applicable thereto, such tax may be collected by levy or by a proceeding in court, but only if the levy is made or the proceeding begun —

"(1) Within six years after the assessment of the tax".

The taxes involved here were assessed on September 2, 1966, and October 9, 1967. The United States was served with process in this foreclosure action on October 22, 1971 and served its notice of appearance on or about November 16, 1971, and waived all notices except notices (1) of application for discontinuance, (2) of sale, (3) of report of sale, and (4) of all proceedings to obtain surplus money. The United States has not instituted any independent action or proceeding to recover the taxes due.

The question presented here is whether the appearance of the United States in this action is a "proceeding in court" in which the United States can collect the taxes due it within the contemplation of Section 6502 of title 26 of the United States Code. This is a question of Federal law whose resolution depends on the nature, function and effect of such an appearance under State law (United States v Saxe, 261 F.2d 316; United States v American Cas. Co., 238 F. Supp. 36). "Clearly, however, when process has been adequate to bring in the parties and to start the case on a course of judicial handling which may lead to final judgment without issuance of new initial process, it is enough to commence the action" (Herb v Pitcairn, 325 U.S. 77, 79; Burnett v N.Y. Cent. R.R. Co., 380 U.S. 424).

The United States is entitled to use proceedings in State courts to collect its claims (Matter of Feinberg, 18 N.Y.2d 499; Matter of Gellatly, 283 N.Y. 125; Matter of Weinbaum, 43 Misc.2d 991). Here the United States has submitted its claim to this court's jurisdiction. Since surplus money proceedings are an appropriate vehicle to effect the collection of claims, the court concludes that the presence of the United States in this action is a "proceeding in court" within the meaning of section 6502 of title 26 of the United States Code. The judicial settlement of claims against a corpus is such a proceeding (see Matter of Feinberg, supra). The claims of the United States are therefore not barred by the Federal Statute of Limitations since their action was commenced and the United States appeared herein less than six years after the assessments of tax.

Accordingly, the motion to confirm the referee's report is granted; the fee of the referee shall be fixed by the court in the order to be submitted herein.


Summaries of

Emigrant Savings Bank v. Parker

Supreme Court, Special Term, Kings County
Jul 14, 1975
85 Misc. 2d 22 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1975)
Case details for

Emigrant Savings Bank v. Parker

Case Details

Full title:EMIGRANT SAVINGS BANK, Plaintiff, v. LEONARD E. PARKER et al., Defendants

Court:Supreme Court, Special Term, Kings County

Date published: Jul 14, 1975

Citations

85 Misc. 2d 22 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1975)
379 N.Y.S.2d 216