Noll v. Peterson et al

Filing 27

ORDER FINDING CLIFFORD L. NOLL A VEXATIOUS LITIGANT AND IMPOSING PRE-FILING RESTRICTIONS granting 10 Motion to Deem Clifford L. Noll a Vexatious Litigant and for Entry of Pre-Filing Order. Plaintiff, Clifford L. Noll, is PROHIBITED from filing any civil pleadings in this Court challenging the assessment or collection of federal income taxes (either filed against the United States or against federal officers) unless and until those pleadings have been reviewed by a District Judge or Magistrate Judge for possible legal merit pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 prior to being electronically filed and served, and that the United States, or individual defendants sued in their official or individual capacities, must only respond to s uch pleadings when ordered to by this Court.Signed by Senior Judge Wm. Fremming Nielsen. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by (cjs) (Additional attachment(s) added on 9/17/2015: # 1 Appendix 1, 92-cv-282, # 2 Appendix 2, 93-cv-100, # 3 Appendix 3, 94-cv-521, # 4 Appendix 4, 96-cv-280 part 1 of 3, # 5 Appendix 4, 96-cv-280-1 part 2 of 3, # 6 Appendix 4, 96-cv-280 part 3 of 3, # 7 Appendix 5, 97-c v-145 part 1 of 3, # 8 Appendix 5, 97-cv-145 part 2 of 3, # 9 Appendix 5, 97-cv-145 part 3 of 3, # 10 Appendix 6, 99-cv-590, # 11 Appendix 7, 01-cv-2, # 12 Appendix 8, 02-cv-87, # 13 Appendix 9, 02-cv-484, # 14 Appendix 10, 03-cv-34, # 15 Appendix 11, 12-cv-138) (cjs). Modified on 9/17/2015 to reflect electronic notice and mailing regenerated for attached Appendices (cjs).

Appendix 3
Noll v. United States, 3:94-CV-521-EJL (D. Idaho)

Clifford L. Noll
71 5 N . 1 3th S t •
Coeur d,Alene, Idaho 83814
Phone [phone]

R:::-c'D·
\1....

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF

--

~-vDGE D

FtbKMo---~£[~<'=----:--

CLIFFORD L. NOLL & SUSAN J. NOLL
husband and wife,
plaintiff,

CiV 9 4 - 0 0 52 1 - N- EJL

CIV NO.

v.

--

I

I

COMPLAINT
INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE,
United States Dept. of Treasury,
defendant.
By Sunny Trumbull
on Jul 23, 2015 4:59 pm

Comes now the plaintiff and for his cause of action against
the defendant alleges and states as follows:
Agents for the Internal Revenue Service (hereafter referred
to as IRS) have resorted to extortion to extract money form
the plaintiffs under the guise of income tax. For the years
1976, 1977, 1978, 1979, 1980, 1981, 1982, 1983, 1984, and 1988
the plaintiffs did not earn sufficient income to place them
under the jurisdiction of the IRS. Agents investigating possible
tax liability claimed that the plaintiffs would be imprisoned
for not filing a return that proved that there was no tax
liability. The plaintiffs , under duress, filed income tax
returns. The agents disagreed with the information and filed
their own returns using some form of progressive mathematical
expansion to determine a base to levy a tax upon. The resulting
tax exceeded the gross income for the years in question. When
the plaintiffs complained about the amount and that requiring
us to keep records for 12 years was beyond any statute
requirement, agents said that where the IRS is concerned there

01
I

is no statute of limitations. They were told by the agents that
their only recourse was to pay the tax then file suit in Federal
Court. The plaintiffs lacked assets sufficient enough to pay
the tax which exceeds $200,000.00. At the time the tax liens
were filed the plaintiffs were involved in buying, selling,
and renting houses. After the tax liens were filed IRS agents
proceeded to cut off all ability for the plaintiffs to pay the
tax and file suit by demanding that rental tenants pay all rents
to the IRS. The agents told renters that their wages would be
garnished or their Social Security check would be taken if they
did not comply. Most renters left. No real estate could be sold
without permission from the IRS because of the tax liens. Without
the the ability to use real estate equity to reduce the tax
burden and all rental income cut off the real estate notes could
not be repaid and the lenders moved for foreclosure. The
plaintiffs had a buyer for one house and agreed to allow the
IRS to have all proceeds above the bank note. IRS agents were
told they would receive about $20,000.00 from this sale. The
agents put off making the decision to allow the sale week after
week until the bank foreclosed and the opportunity for the
plaintiffs to reduce the tax burden by $20,000.00 was lost.
The plaintiffs had an offer on another house for $36,000.00
in 1990 to which the agency would not respond. In 1994 that
house was worth $55,000.00 and the agency sold that house in
July 1994 at IRS sale for about $17,000.00 •
• The plaintiffs hoped they could gather proof through the Freedom
of Information Act (FOIA) that no records exist, or ever have
existed, to support the agency's action and therefore the claims
for the United States could not stand on its merit. After the
request and appeal were denied, the plaintiffs filed suit
See Noll V. IRS, CV-0100-N-HLR). This suit was dismissed because
the information we wanted the court to review was not exactly
the same as what we sought in our FOIA request and therefor
we had not exhausted all administrative remedies. The plaintiffs

02

then filed new FOIA requests being very specific about the
records we wanted. The records have been refused (see attached
FOIA letter, and FOIA appeal). With fraud and extortion coming
from within the agency it is to their benefit to refuse access
to the records that would expose it, therefore, no administrative
remedy can be relied upon. The United States cannot collect
because we have no assets and it has been more than 3 years
since the liens were filed therefore bankruptcy would eliminate
them. Even though the government cannot collect, we can still
lose. A bankruptcy will eliminate us from being involved in
real estate for another 7 to 10 years. It would eliminate the
possibility of recouping the damages the agency has inflicted
upon us. If this matter can be settled before July 1995, we
can recoup the $55,000.00 property that was sold at the tax
sale. Bankruptcy would eliminate that opportunity. It would
also harm the businesses and individuals that we truly owe money
to.
This court has jurisdiction under Title 5 USC, Section 702.
A court order requiring the IRS to bring the records they used
to support their actions will expose the fraud that has been
perpetrated against the plaintiffs. How could a claim for the
United States that is based on fraud and extortion stand?

(!~~/
Clifford L. Noll
Date

71oy

??-2

I

;99tj

03

',

CLIFFORD L. NOLL

I

J

·~·

715 N. 13th St.
Coeur d'Alene, Idaho 83814
( 208) 765-4562
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF IDAHO
CLIFFORD L. NOLL and
SUSAN J. NOLL
Plaintiffs,

v.

Civil No.
AFFIDAVIT

INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE,
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT
OF TREASURY,
Defandant,

I, CLIFFORD L. NOLL, hereby state that the foregoing statements in the
above titled action, are correct and complete to the best of my ability.

~/~
Clif ord L. Noll
STATE OF IDA~
~
COUNTY OF
f+Mtl~
On

, .a

this~;J~y of~kt..-1994,
notary~b~ic

before me

in and for said state

~~ ~ :z?~.

~~

of Idaho, personally appeared

known or identified to me to be the person

whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to

04

-r~

(.lo - •

.- -

[j·•' • !lj "TV ., , { ,·;;... <r.• :·
S l ..
.',)I..J,
'-·.·
~ 1

·;· }~12:, ~

V

II\ j -· _,._ _ _ __ •

:'< / l ;::,_:,:·j ____.. _.,

~JAN 16 f\t!.ln:08 ~
r. . .- G,. Q___ -·- _ __ 't lLt:.\J_(];iJ,.
- ....... ..
.tt ,.

CA HEHGN :~. _ flURKL
CLERK, IDAHO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF IDAHO

)

CLIFFORD L. NOLL and
SUSAN J. NOLL,

)
)

Plaintiffs,

)

Case No . CV 94-0521-N-EJL

)

vs.

) · ORDER ADOPTING REPORT
)
AND RECOMMENDATION

INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE,
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF
TREASURY,

)
)
)
)

Defendant.

)
By Sunny Trumbull
on Jul 23, 2015 5:00 pm

)

On September 7, 1995, United States Magistrate Judge Mikel
H. Williams issued a Report and Recommendation,

(Dkt. No. 22)

recommending that the defendant's motion to dismiss plaintiff's
complaint be granted, and that the complaint be dismissed in its
entirety.
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
in

AO 72A
I RPv A/A?\

which

to

file

§

written

636(b) (1), the parties had ten days
objections

to

the

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION - Page 1
05

Report

and

{) 'h

r

! ·

Recommendation.

Neither party has objected to Judge Williams'

recommendation.

Exercising de novo review of the matter, this

court may accept,

reject or modify,

in whole or in part,

findings and recommendations made by the magistrate judge.

the
~.

Because this court finds the Report and Recommendation of
Judge Williams to be well founded in law and supported by the
record, the court hereby accepts in their entirety, and adopts
as its own, the findings made by Judge Williams.
recommendation of Judge Williams,

Acting on the

and this court being fully

advised in the premises,
IT

IS

HEREBY

ORDERED

that

Judge

Recommendation entered on September 7,

Williams'
1995,

Report

(Dkt.

No.

and
22)

should be, and is hereby, INCORPORATED by reference and ADOPTED
in its entirety.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendant's motion
the plaintiff's complaint
this action is
Dated this

AO 72A
/ r:lov

A/A?\

DISMI~ED

~day

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT

(Dkt. No.

17)

to

be GRANTED,

in its entirety.
of January, 1996.

OMMENDATION - Page 2
06

dismiss
and that

r-

r

bnited States
for
District
January

* *
Re:

District
the
of Idaho
16, 1996

dw

Court -~

CLERK'S CERTIFICATE OF MAILING

* *

3:94-cv-00521

I certify that a copy of the attached document was mailed to the
following named persons:
Clifford L Noll
715 N 13 St
Coeur d'Alene, ID

~~

w~

83814

Andrea M Pogue, Esq.
US ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
Box 32
Boise, ID 83707
Robert S Attardo, Esq.
US DEPT OF JUSTICE
Tax Division
Ben Franklin Station
PO Box 227
Washington, DC 20044
Susan J Noll
715 N 13th St
Coeur d'Alene,

ID

83814

Cameron S. Burke, Clerk
Date:

~·/~,

BY:

!99(p,

07

~
Clerk~~,~

(Deputy