United States of America v. Coleman et al

Filing 29

ORDER signed by Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 5/22/14. The 26 Default Judgment and 25 Order Granting Default Judgment are VACATED and this matter is referred back to the assigned magistrate judge for further proceedings. (Manzer, C)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14
15
16

No. 2:12-cv-2519-KJM-KJN

v.

ORDER

ALAN S. COLEMAN; STACI E.
COLEMAN, a/k/a/ STACI FRANCIE,
STACI HARDCASTLE, STACI
FRANCIS, AND STACI FORD,
Defendants.

17

This matter is before the court on the motion by the United States of America (the

18
19

“government”) to amend the default judgment entered against defendant Alan S. Coleman

20

(“defendant”) on February 26, 2014, (ECF 26). (Pl.’s Mot. to Am. Default J., ECF 27.) The

21

court decided the matter without a hearing. As explained below, the court VACATES its prior

22

default judgment order and refers the case to the magistrate judge assigned to this case for further

23

proceedings. The court does not express an opinion about the merits of the Government’s

24

motion.

25

I.

26

DISCUSSION
The government has filed this action seeking to reduce to judgment federal tax

27

assessments against defendant for outstanding tax liabilities. (Complaint (“Compl.”) ¶¶ 14-19,

28

ECF 1.) On March 27, 2013, the clerk entered a default (ECF 10), and on January 9, 2014, the
1

1

assigned magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations recommending that plaintiff’s

2

motion for default judgment against defendant be granted (ECF 24). This court adopted that

3

recommendation and entered a default judgment against defendant on February 26, 2014 (ECF

4

26). The judgment was for individual income tax liabilities for the 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004,

5

2005, and 2006 tax years in the amount of $543,878.88.

6
7
8
9

In the present motion, filed on March 18, 2014, the government seeks to amend the
court’s default judgment order in the following manner:
1. Enter judgment in the amount of $559,412.52 against defendant for assessed
individual federal income tax liabilities for “the 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004,

10

2005, and 2006 tax periods and accrued but unassessed interest calculated

11

through October 31, 2013 pursuant to 26 U.S.C. §§ 6601, 6621-6622, less any

12

payments;”

13
14
15
16
17

2. “Interest accruing after October 31, 2013 through the date of entry of judgment
pursuant to 26 U.S.C. §§ 6601, 6621-6622;” and
3. “Interest accruing pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1961(c) and 26 U.S.C. §§ 6601,
6621-6622 after the entry of judgment and until paid.” (ECF 27.)
The government argues: “As entered, the judgment could be read as not providing

18

for statutory interest accruing after October 31, 2013.” (ECF 27-1 at 2.) This error, the

19

government reasons, resulted from its inadvertence. (Id. n.1.) Accordingly, the court VACATES

20

the default judgment (ECF 26) and its order granting the default judgment (ECF 25) and refers

21

the case back to the assigned magistrate judge for further proceedings.

22
23

IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: May 22, 2014.

24
25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

26
27
28
2