USA v. Berryman et al
Filing
115
AMENDED FINAL JUDGMENT by Clerk re: 114 Order on Unopposed Motion for Corrected Final Judgment under Rule 60(a). By Clerk on 3/19/2015. (alowe)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 11-cv-02708-WYD-KLM
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff/s,
v.
NANCY D. BERRYMAN;
THE TEMPLE OF THE UNVEILED GOD;
THE OFFICE OF THE OVERSEER OF DEDICATION TO ENLIGHTENMENT; and
her successors, a corporation sole,
Defendants.
AMENDED FINAL JUDGMENT
Pursuant to and in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 58(a) and the Order Granting
United States' Unopposed Motion for Corrected Final Judgment under Rule 60(a), filed
on September 27, 2013, by the Honorable Wiley Y. Daniel, Senior United States District
Judge, and incorporated herein by reference as if fully set forth, it is
ORDERED that the Clerk shall correct the final judgment [ECF No. 107], so
that it includes both the judgment against Defendant Berryman for the tax years 1999,
2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, and 2006, in the amount of $142,595.58, plus other
statutory additions from October 1, 2012, in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1961(c)(1) and
26 U.S.C. § 6621, until judgment is paid in full (ECF No. 77, p. 16), and the judgment
against Defendant Berryman for the tax year 1997 in the amount of $395,136.63 as of
December 2, 2013, plus other statutory additions from December 2, 2013, in
-1-
accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1961(c)(1) and 26 U.S.C. § 6621, until judgment is paid in
full. (ECF No. 106, p. 8).
Pursuant to and in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 58(a) and the Order Affirming
and Adopting Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge, filed on September
27, 2013, by the Honorable Wiley Y. Daniel, Senior United States District Judge, and
incorporated herein by reference as if fully set forth, it is
ORDERED that the Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Mix
[ECF Doc. No. 66] is AFFIRMED AND ADOPTED. The Objections [ECF Doc. Nos. 67
and 68] are OVERRULED. It is further
ORDERED that default judgment is hereby entered in favor of Plaintiff, United
States of America, and against Defendants, Nancy D. Berryman; the Temple of the
Unveiled God; the Office of the Overseer of Dedication to Enlightenment; and Her
Successors, a Corporation Sole, regarding Defendant Berryman's tax liability for the tax
years 1999, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, and 2006, in the total amount of
$142,595.58, plus other statutory additions from October 1, 2012, in accordance with 28
U.S.C. § 1961(c)(1) and 26 U.S.C. § 6621, until judgment is paid in full. It is further
ORDERED that post-judgment interest shall accrue on the total amount of
$142,595.58 at the current rate of 0.10%, as calculated pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1961,
from the date of entry of judgment.
Pursuant to and in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 58(a) and the Order Affirming
and Adopting Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge, filed on May 16,
2014, by the Honorable Wiley Y. Daniel, Senior United States District Judge, and
-2-
incorporated herein by reference as if fully set forth, it is hereby
ORDERED that the Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Mix
[ECF Doc. No. 99] is AFFIRMED AND ADOPTED. It is further
ORDERED that judgment is hereby entered in favor of Plaintiff, United States of
America, and against Defendant, Nancy D. Berryman, in the total amount of
$395,136.63 as of December 2, 2013, plus other statutory additions from December 2,
203, in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1961(c)(1) and 26 U.S.C. § 6621, until judgment is
paid in full. It is further
ORDERED that an Order of Foreclosure and Decree of Sale of the Subject
Property shall enter in favor of the Plaintiff. It is further
ORDERED that post-judgment interest shall accrue at the current rate of 0.09%,
as calculated pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1961, from the date of entry of judgment.
DATED at Denver, Colorado this 19th day of March, 2015.
FOR THE COURT:
JEFFREY P. COLWELL, CLERK
/s/ Robert R. Keech
Robert R. Keech,
Deputy Clerk
-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?