From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

U.S. v. Clark

United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Tampa Division
Sep 12, 2007
CASE NO: 8:06-cv-1862-T-26TGW (M.D. Fla. Sep. 12, 2007)

Opinion

CASE NO: 8:06-cv-1862-T-26TGW.

September 12, 2007


ORDER


Plaintiff, the United States of America, seeks summary judgment against Defendant, Alphonso J. Clark, for unpaid federal income taxes for the taxable years 1998, 1999, 2000, and 2001, and to foreclose its tax liens on real property held in the name of Alphonso J. Clark's nominee, Defendant, April E. Clark. Although the Court placed the Clark Defendants on notice that their responses to any motion for summary judgment would be due on or before September 10, 2007, by an order entered February 9, 2007, the Court, in recognition of their pro se status and consistent with Eleventh Circuit precedent, issued another order directing a response on or before September 10, 2007. Defendant, Alphonso J. Clark, has filed a response. Defendant, April E. Clark, has not.

See docket 24.

See docket 54.

Defendant, Alphonso J. Clark, has filed a pleading styled "Judicial Notice Re: April E. Clark Response." He states that there was insufficient time for her to comply with the Court's last order regarding the filing of a response because there was insufficient time to forward it to her at her location in California. The Court will not await Defendant, April E. Clark's, response for two reasons. First, as noted in the body of this order, she was put on notice that a response had to be filed by September 10, 2007, by an order entered on February 9, 2007. Second, Defendant, April E. Clark, has never notified the clerk of a change of address since this Court's order of February 9, 2007, directing that all orders be sent to her "care of Defendant Alphonso J. Clark's address until such time as she files a notice of change of address with the clerk."

After carefully examining Plaintiff's submissions and Defendant, Alphonso J. Clark's, submissions, the Court makes the following findings of fact. First, Plaintiff's assessments for Alphonso J. Clark's income tax liabilities for the years at issue in the sum of $79,708.13 as of July 9, 2007, are presumptively valid, and he has failed to meet his burden of proving that the computational method used was arbitrary and without foundation.See United States v. Ruetz, 2007 WL 2330766 *2 (M.D. Fla. 2007) (citing in part Olster v. Commissioner, 751 F.2d 1168, 1174 (11th Cir. 1985)). Second, Alphonso J. Clark has failed to satisfy this liability. Third, Plaintiff holds a valid tax lien against the subject property pursuant to 26 U.S.C. §§ 6321 and 6322. Fourth, April E. Clark holds the subject property as a nominee of Alphonso J. Clark and thus is not entitled to the protection afforded by 26 U.S.C. § 6323. Fifth, Plaintiff is entitled to foreclose its liens on the subject property in accord with the provisions of 26 U.S.C. § 7403, free from the claim of Defendant, Citibank (South Dakota), N.A., but subject to the superior first mortgage of Defendant, Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

The Court notes that the facts of Ruetz closely mirror the facts of the instant case, and the court's ruling in that case supports granting Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment in this case.

Alternatively, the Court finds that given the circumstances surrounding the transfer of the property, including the fact that April E. Clark gave nothing of value to Alphonso J. Clark, the transfer qualifies as a fraudulent transfer under Florida law, section 726.106, Florida Statutes.

See docket 34.

See docket 48.

Accordingly, it is ordered and adjudged as follows:

1) Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 53) is granted.

2) The Clerk is directed to enter judgment in favor of Plaintiff and against Defendants, Alphonso J. Clark, April E. Clark, and Citibank (South Dakota), N.A.

3) The Clerk is directed to enter judgment in favor of Defendant, Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

4) Defendant, Alphonso J. Clark is indebted to the United States for unpaid federal income tax liabilities for the taxable tears 1998, 1999, 2000, and 2001, in the total sum of $79,708.13, as of July 9, 2007, plus additional fees, interest, and statutory additions accruing thereafter as provided by law.

5) The subject property located at 829A East Gulf Boulevard, Indian Rocks Breach, Florida, shall be foreclosed and sold and the proceeds distributed in accordance with the Court's order found at docket 48.

6) The Court reserves jurisdiction to enforce the provisions of this order.

7) The Clerk is directed to close this case.

DONE AND ORDERED


Summaries of

U.S. v. Clark

United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Tampa Division
Sep 12, 2007
CASE NO: 8:06-cv-1862-T-26TGW (M.D. Fla. Sep. 12, 2007)
Case details for

U.S. v. Clark

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. ALPHONSO J. CLARK, APRIL E. CLARK…

Court:United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Tampa Division

Date published: Sep 12, 2007

Citations

CASE NO: 8:06-cv-1862-T-26TGW (M.D. Fla. Sep. 12, 2007)

Citing Cases

Leeds LP v. United States

If the United States establishes that Plaintiff is the Ballantyne's nominee, then Plaintiff is not entitled…

Fourth Investment LP v. United States

If the United States establishes that Plaintiff is the Ballantyne's nominee, then Plaintiff is not entitled…