United States of America v. Davis et al

Filing 47

ORDER Staying Execution of Judgment Pending Resolution of 42 Defendant's Objection to Order of Sale. Signed by District Judge Terrence G. Berg. (Chubb, A)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. Case No. 13-11245 HON. TERRENCE G. BERG RONALD DAVIS, and DIANE DAVIS, Defendants. ____________________________________/ ORDER STAYING EXECUTION OF JUDGMENT PENDING RESOLUTION OF DEFENDANT’S OBJECTION TO ORDER OF SALE (DKT. 42) On April 29, 2015, the Court entered an order of sale for real property located at 6735 Meadowlake Road, Bloomfield Hills, Michigan to satisfy Defendant Ronald Davis’s obligation to pay his federal tax liabilities under 26 U.S.C. §§ 7402(a) and 7403(b). (Dkt. 42.) On April 30, 2015, Defendant Diane Davis filed an objection to the order of sale alleging that a forced sale by auction falls short of the requirement of “just compensation” under 26 U.S.C. § 7403. Defendant’s objection, if granted, would clearly require amendment of the order of sale. Consequently, in order to preserve the status quo pending the Court’s ruling on this objection after considering the government’s response, it is necessary and appropriate to stay the execution of the order of sale. Wherefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, that the Order for Sale of Real Property entered on April 29, 2015 is STAYED, and any action to enforce such order shall cease, pending the Court’s ruling on Defendant’s objection. Plaintiff shall respond to Defendant’s objection within 14 days of the date of this Order. SO ORDERED. Dated: May 11, 2015 s/Terrence G. Berg TERRENCE G. BERG UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Certificate of Service I hereby certify that this Order was electronically submitted on May 11, 2015, using the CM/ECF system, which will send notification to all parties. s/A. Chubb Case Manager 2

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?