United States of America v. Griffith

Filing 27

MEMORANDUM OPINION and ORDER Granting Plaintiff's 25 MOTION for Summary Judgment - Signed by District Judge Judith E. Levy. (FMos)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
United States of America,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. 15-cv-10359
Judith E. Levy
United States District Judge

Bruce R. Griffith,
Mag. Judge Elizabeth A. Stafford
Defendant.
________________________________/
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR
SUMMARY JUDGMENT [25]
This is a case concerning unpaid taxes.

Pending is plaintiff’s

motion for summary judgment. (Dkt. 25.) Defendant has not responded
to the motion.

The Court determines that oral argument is not

necessary, and will decide the motion on the brief filed pursuant to E.D.
Mich. Local R. 7.1(f)(2).
I.

Background

On January 27, 2015, plaintiff filed a complaint alleging that
defendant, owner of BBB Auto Enterprise, LLC, had $48,479.85 in
unpaid back taxes and civil penalties. (Dkt. 1 at 2-3.) Records show

that defendant is the owner of real property located at 6132-6200 E. 11
Mile Road in Warren, MI. (Id. at 3-4.) Plaintiff seeks a lien against
that property.
On July 15, 2015, plaintiff filed a motion for summary judgment,
seeking: (1) a declaration that defendant is liable for $51,207.63 in
unpaid taxes, penalties, and interest as of July 13, 2016; (2) a
declaration that defendant is liable for statutory additions to that
amount from July 13, 2016, including interest pursuant to 26 U.S.C. §§
6601, 6621, and 6622, as well as 28 U.S.C. § 1961(c), until judgment is
satisfied; and (3) confirmation that federal tax liens have attached to
the above-mentioned real property and plaintiff may enforce such liens
against the property.

(Dkt. 25.)

Defendant did not respond to the

motion.
II.

Legal Standard

Summary judgment is proper where “the movant shows that there
is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled
to judgment as a matter of law.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a). The Court may
not grant summary judgment if “the evidence is such that a reasonable
jury could return a verdict for the nonmoving party.”
2

Anderson v.

Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 248. The Court “views the evidence,
all facts, and any inferences that may be drawn from the facts in the
light most favorable to the nonmoving party.” Pure Tech Sys., Inc. v.
Mt. Hawley Ins. Co., 95 F. App'x 132, 135 (6th Cir. 2004) (citing
Skousen v. Brighton High Sch., 305 F.3d 520, 526 (6th Cir.2002)).
III. Analysis
At the summary judgment stage of a tax assessment and lien case
such as this one, “the Government is awarded an initial presumption of
correctness for its assessment, placing the burden of disproving such
assessments on the taxpayer.” United States v. Hammon, 277 F. App'x
560, 563 (6th Cir. 2008) (citing United States v. Besase, 623 F.2d 463,
465 (6th Cir. 1980)).

“The burden on the taxpayer is not merely a

burden of producing evidence; it is a burden of persuasion by the
preponderance of the evidence that the assessment is not correct.”
Calderone v. United States, 799 F.2d 254, 258 (6th Cir. 1986) (citing
Sinder v. United States, 655 F.2d 729, 731 (6th Cir. 1981)).
Here, plaintiff has provided extensive records of assessments of
defendant’s owed taxes, as well as a declaration from Jake Adamczyk, a
Revenue Officer employed by the Internal Revenue Service. (See Dkts.
3

25-2, 25-3.) The assessments and supporting declaration show that, as
of July 13, 2016, defendant owed $51,207.63 to the Internal Revenue
Service.

Defendant did not respond to the motion for summary

judgment. Accordingly, he has not met his burden, and the Court will
accept the assessment as valid. Defendant is liable for $51,207.63 as of
July 13, 2016, plus any applicable statutory additions of interest and
other penalties since that date.
Plaintiff seeks a lien on the real property owned by defendant,
pursuant to 26 U.S.C. § 7403. Section 7403 permits the Government to
file a civil action in a district court “[i]n any case where there has been a
refusal or neglect to pay any tax, or to discharge any liability in respect
thereof, whether or not levy has been made. . . .” The lien arises when
“any person liable to pay any tax neglects or refuses to pay the same
after demand” and “the amount . . . shall be a lien in favor of the United
States upon all property and rights to property, whether real or
personal, belonging to such person.” 26 U.S.C. § 6321.
Plaintiff has established that a lien exists on the real property
owned by defendant in the amount of his unpaid taxes. Accordingly,

4

plaintiff may enforce its lien to the extent permitted by applicable law,
including judicial sale.
IV.

Conclusion

For the reasons set forth above, it is hereby ordered that:
Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment (Dkt. 25) is GRANTED;
Defendant is determined to be liable for $51,207.63 in unpaid
taxes, penalties, and interest as of July 13, 2016 as well as any
applicable statutory additions of interest and penalties since that date;
and
Plaintiff may enforce its lien on defendant’s real property as
described above, including through judicial sale.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: September 13, 2016
Ann Arbor, Michigan

s/Judith E. Levy
JUDITH E. LEVY
United States District Judge

5

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
The undersigned certifies that the foregoing document was served
upon counsel of record and any unrepresented parties via the Court’s
ECF System to their respective email or First Class U.S. mail addresses
disclosed on the Notice of Electronic Filing on September 13, 2016.

s/Felicia M. Moses
FELICIA M. MOSES
Case Manager

6