United States of America v. Leoncio Amador, et al
ORDER APPROVING 1 United States petition for judicial approval of levy on principal residence filed by United States of America; see Order for specifics. Signed by Honorable P. K. Holmes, III on July 7, 2015. (hnc)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
FORT SMITH DIVISION
In the matter of the Tax Indebtedness of
LEONCIO AMADOR aka LEONCIO AMADOR-VILLANUEVA
and KELLIE AMADOR aka KELLIE STUBBS
Case No. 2:14-MC-00039
ORDER APPROVING LEVY ON PRINCIPAL RESIDENCE
Before the Court is the United States’ petition for judicial approval of levy on principal
residence. (Doc. 1). The United States seeks an order approving an administrative levy by the
Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) on the principal residence of Leoncio Amador and Kellie Amador
for unpaid federal tax liabilities for tax years 2007 and 2008. In support of its petition, the United
States submitted two declarations of Revenue Officer William C. Simpson, as well as IRS Forms
4340 for the Amadors for tax years 2007 and 2008. The Amadors responded to the petition (Doc.
10) and generally challenged the underlying tax assessments and the sufficiency of the petition and
declaration in support. The Government filed a reply (Doc. 12) with leave of Court. Having
considered the record, the Court finds that the petition should be GRANTED.
Through Officer Simpson’s declarations and the attached IRS forms, the United States has
demonstrated that (1) the Amadors’ tax liabilities have not been satisfied; (2) the requirements of
any applicable law or administrative procedure relevant to the levy have been met; and (3) no
reasonable alternative for the collection of the Amadors’ unpaid tax liabilities exists, all as required
to establish a prima facie case supporting a levy on a principal residence. 26 C.F.R. § 301.63341(d)(1). In accordance with federal regulations, after the petition was filed, the Court issued an order
to the Amadors to show cause as to why their principal residence should not be levied. (Doc. 2).
The Amadors filed a response to the petition and the order to show cause on November 10,
2014. A taxpayer challenging a petition to levy on a principal residence must be “granted a hearing
to rebut the Government’s prima facie case if the taxpayer files an objection within the time period
required by the court raising a genuine issue of material fact demonstrating that the underlying tax
liability has been satisfied, that the taxpayer has other assets from which the liability can be
satisfied, or that the Service did not follow the applicable laws and procedures pertaining to the
levy.” 26 C.F.R. § 301.6334-1(d)(2). In their response, the Amadors did not raise any issue of fact
as to whether the underlying tax liability had been satisfied1 or offer any other assets from which the
liability could be satisfied. The only assertions that could be construed as challenging whether the
IRS followed applicable laws or procedure are the assertions that (1) they did not receive notice of
how the assessments were tabulated and that such documentation was not attached in support of the
petition; (2) that the declaration in support of the petition was not properly verified; and (3) that
neither the Amadors nor their agents had received requested transcripts of documents filed with the
IRS. (Doc. 10, ¶¶ 14-16). None of these challenges raises a genuine issue of material fact that
would warrant a hearing.
The Amadors’ challenge that they did not receive proper notice is belied by the 4340 forms
attached to the United States’ reply. Both forms show that the Amadors were given numerous
notices of balances due and intent to levy. Furthermore, whether the underlying assessment was
properly calculated and whether the Amadors received particular transcripts from the IRS is not
relevant to this proceeding, and this is not the proper forum to challenge those issues. 26 C.F.R. §
301.6334-1(d)(2) (prohibiting taxpayers from challenging the merits of the underlying tax liability
The Amadors in fact “admit that they have not paid the assessment” described in the
petition based on their argument that it is “improper.” (Doc. 10, ¶ 6).
in a proceeding for approval of a levy on a principal residence). Finally, Officer Simpson’s
declarations, both in support of the original petition and in support of the reply, were properly
verified as they were signed and dated under penalty of perjury. 28 U.S.C. § 1746. Because the
Amadors’ response to the petition and the order to show cause did not raise a genuine issue of
material fact as to any relevant issue, no hearing is necessary. Based on a review of the record, the
Court finds that the United States’ petition for approval of a levy on the Amadors’ residence should
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the United States’ petition for judicial approval of levy
on the Amadors’ principal residence is GRANTED, and the Court approves the IRS’s levy on the
property at 523 Sharp Chapel Road, Alma, AR 72921, as more particularly described in the petition
(Doc. 1, p. 2), to satisfy all or part of the Amadors’ unpaid federal income tax liabilities for tax years
2007 and 2008.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 7th day of July, 2015.
/s/P. K. Holmes, III
P.K. HOLMES, III
CHIEF U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?