United States of America v. Shirley Chang et al
Filing
32
ORDER FOR ENTRY OF JUDGMENT 31 by Judge David O. Carter: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that: On December 23, 2015, the United States and Shirley Yu filed a joint stipulation for entry of a judgment resolving Count I[Dkt. 27.] On Decembe r 28, 2015, this Court granted the stipulation for entry of judgment[Dkt. 29.] On January 4, 2016, this Court entered an order for entry of judgment against Shirley Yu and in favor of the United States[Dkt. 30]; After resolving Court I, the parties h ave now entered into a Stipulation to resolve Court II; Based upon the parties' stipulation to resolve Count II, the Court grants the parties' stipulation and orders that judgment should be entered in favor of the United States and against Hon Yu, M.D.., Inc., in the amount of $200,000. See document for further information. (lwag)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
EILEEN M. DECKER
United States Attorney
SANDRA R. BROWN
Assistant United States Attorney
Chief, Tax Division
BENJAMIN L. TOMPKINS (SBN 305024)
Assistant United States Attorney
Federal Building, Suite 7516
300 North Los Angeles Street
Los Angeles, California 90012
Telephone: (213) 894-6165
Facsimile: (213) 894-0115
E-mail: benjamin.tompkins@usdoj.gov
8
9
Attorneys for Plaintiff
United States of America
10
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
SOUTHERN DIVISION
11
12
13
14
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
15
vs.
16
17
18
SHIRLEY CHANG a/k/a SHIRLEY
YU, HON YU, MD, INC., and HON
YU,
19
Defendants.
20
21
22
)
) Case No.: 8:14-cv-01775-DOC-RNB
)
) XXXXXX ORDER FOR ENTRY OF
[Proposed]
) JUDGMENT
[31]
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Based on the stipulation between Plaintiff United States of America (“United
23
States”) and Defendants Shirley Chang a/k/a Shirley Yu (“Shirley Yu”), Dr. Hon Yu
24
(“Dr. Yu”), and Hon Yu, M.D., Inc., through their undersigned counsel, and for good
25
26
cause appearing herein:
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that:
27
1.
On November 6, 2014, the United States filed this action to seek a judgment
28
against Shirley Yu in excess of $3 million for her unpaid trust fund recovery penalties
for various periods from 2007 through 2009 (“Count I”); and to foreclose an Internal
1
Revenue Service lien and sell Shirley Yu’s community property interest in the shares of
2
Hon Yu, MD, Inc., her now ex-husband’s medical practice (“Count II”). [Dkt. 1]
3
4
5
2.
On January 2, 2015, Shirley Yu, Dr. Hon Yu and Hon Yu, MD, Inc., filed
their answer to the United States’ complaint. [Dkts. 18 & 20.]
3.
On December 23, 2015, the United States and Shirley Yu filed a joint
6
stipulation for entry of a judgment resolving Count I. [Dkt. 27.] On December 28,
7
2015, this Court granted the stipulation for entry of judgment. [Dkt. 29.] On January 4,
8
2016, this Court entered an order for entry of judgment against Shirley Yu and in favor
9
of the United States. [Dkt. 30.]
10
11
12
4.
After resolving Count I, the parties have now entered into a Stipulation to
resolve Count II.
5.
Based upon the parties’ stipulation to resolve Count II, the Court grants the
13
parties’ stipulation and orders that judgment should be entered in favor of the United
14
States and against Hon Yu, M.D., Inc., in the amount of $200,000.
15
16
6.
Additional interest and other statutory additions on this judgment will
continue to accrue after this judgment is entered.
17
7.
This judgment resolves Count II.
18
8.
Each side will bear their own attorneys’ fees and costs.
19
20
IT IS SO ORDERED.
21
22
23
Dated: February 2, 2016
DAVID O. CARTER
United States District Judge
24
25
26
27
28
2
1
2
3
4
Respectfully Presented,
EILEEN M. DECKER
United States Attorney
SANDRA R. BROWN
Assistant United States Attorney
Chief, Tax Division
5
6
7
8
/s/
BENJAMIN L. TOMPKINS
Assistant United States Attorney
Attorneys for the United States of America
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
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?