NAFPS Forum
General => Frauds => Topic started by: weheli on June 25, 2006, 08:35:06 pm
-
http://www.adl.org/learn/ext_us/Little_Shell.asp?LEARN_Cat=Extremism&LEARN_SubCat=Extremism_in_America&xpicked=3&item=little_shell
While researching another project ran across this. Native "Little Shell" white extremism. Found one is in ILL and another in KY, hmmm, as well as many places across the country. Dangerous Groups!!!
Weheli
-
I thought that name rang a bell:
http://www.newagefraud.org/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1122050619/4#4
-
Could you tell us more about the chapters in IL and KY and elsewhere? I think this is the first we've heard of them being outside of Montana, unless you count Aslan Hart's phony ceremonis and workshops.
-
http://www.adl.org/learn/Events_2001/events_2003_flashmap.asp?LEARN_Cat=Extremism&LEARN_SubCat=Upcoming_Extremist_Events
http://www.adl.org/learn/ext_us/loc/default.asp?LEARN_Cat=Extremism&LEARN_SubCat=Extremism_by_State#ky
I may be wrong but looking over the sites above which includes Little Shell Pembina Band, this is the Aryan Nation and they are having meetings all over the country, so If I am correct, Little Shell Pembina Band is part of the Aryan Nation.
There is much information on these two sites if you follow through all the information there.
I mentiond the Pembina band as it a fraudulant native group, however they are a fragment of a much larger, dangerous "nation", of which I am not sure is a topic for this forum.
Weheli
-
And Ihope no one confuses this bunch of loons with the REAL Pembina and Little Shell people.
-
Debbiebear,
Do you have a link for the Little Shell and the Pembina that you are refering to. Like you I sure would not like confusion here.
Could you share some information on them as I am not familiar with them.
Wado Weheli :)
-
I didn't find anything about them being in KY or IL in those links or anywhere else on the site. I didn't find any links to the Aryan Nations, who are a separate group part church part paramilitary right down to wannabe Nazi uniforms.
But looking around I did find some more on them. They definitely are in Florida.
http://www.adl.org/learn/ExtremismFloridaINSIDE.pdf
"In the 1990s,Florida, especially central Florida, was one of the hotbeds of sovereign citizen activity.In recent years, such activity has decreased somewhat in Florida, but remains fairlystrong. One relatively new sovereign citizen group, the Little Shell Pembina Band of NorthAmerica, appears to be gaining adherents in Florida. This group pretends to be a NativeAmerican tribal organization, although Native blood is not a prerequisite for member-ship, and claims to be independent of the United States. It has members around thecountry, including Florida. One member, Robert Sumner of Charlotte County, read aspeech before that county's Code Enforcement Board in November 2005 in which hedemanded that their actions regarding his property "cease and desist," or else he would"have to take drastic action against each and every one of you...I am declaringhere...that if anyone comes on my property again, it will be over my own dead body."
-
Many of the true Pembina people are a part of the Turtle Mountain Tribe. There are also Pembina people at Red Lake and White Earth. The Little Shell People are also a part of the Pembina. The Little Shell Tribe has a webpage. I know some of them as my husand is related to some of them through his father. Here is their webpage:
http://www.littleshelltribe.us/
That phony white supremacist/militia group makes me angry as they sully the name of good people. >:(
-
One of the chapters in IL. is the Church of the Creator - Founder Matt Hale. I believe most have heard of him. He even made an appearance on the Jerry Springer show discussing why Native people were of a lower race.
A couple of his followers of his church committed racial hate crimes near Chicago. Shooting and killing two innocent people because of their race. One being Asian, the other a well known black school coach.
While on trial on seperate charges, he tried to have a federal judge killed.
-
http://www.adl.org/learn/ext_us/amren.asp?LEARN_Cat=Extremism&LEARN_SubCat=Extremism_in_America&xpicked=3&item=amren : http://www.adl.org/backgrounders/wcotc.asp
Two more links of interest. IThe point I believe I am trying to get across is that if you look at the Groups you can go to from any of these sites, they are All extremist groups. They are all dangerous.
last 2cents worth. Weheli :)
-
Found this article. Heart is scamming people with mortage elimination schemes.No mention of how many people affected, but it takes someone pretty low to go after desperate people deep in debt who might lose their homes because of him.
----------------------
http://www.fortheconsumer.com/Articles1.shtml
Know Your Rights: Mortgage Elimination Schemes
I am a private attorney general and receive inquiries from numerous consumers. Our firm has recently received some inquiries on so-called mortgage elimination or credit elimination schemes. The Credit Card Dispute Process scheme is by a company known as Consumer Guardians, LLC. It is marketed by Alan Aslan Heart, the same person or company, that markets a mortgage elimination scheme. Alan Aslan Heart is associated with a person or entity known as White Eagle Soaring of the Little Shell Pembina Band, a Treaty Tribe of the Ojibwe Nation. Notably, the paperwork outlining the process say that there are no promises not contained in the writing and that the contract says there is no guarantee as to the results.
Typically, the schemes involve payment of a fee to help you obtain the discharge of a mortgage or the elimination of credit card debt by using consumer protection statutes. The Truth In Lending Act is designed to protect consumers. The Act requires certain information be given to consumers. Consumers can sometimes seek rescission if this law is not followed. But rescission does not mean the consumers can keep the money and avoid the lien too. Unfortunately, most, if not all, of these schemes are illegal. They are also premised on an argument that the entire banking system is flawed. This argument has not worked for tax protesters and it will not work for you.
One attorney who made similar arguments represented over 19,000 consumers until he was sanctioned and disbarred for asserting frivolous defenses on behalf of his consumers. See Matter of Andrew F. Capoccia, 712 N.Y.S. 2d 699 (N.Y. App. 2000); Matter of Andrew F. Capoccia, 709 N.Y.S. 2d 640 (N.Y. App. 2000). According to the Better Business Bureau, this same scheme has been used in Ohio and Wisconsin. As part of the scheme, consumers are being asked to transfer their property ownership to a trust and sign a power of attorney.
When they do so, consumers will likely lose their rights. First, it may be difficult to recover the property. Second, the property may lose homestead exemption status for collection purposes when it is most needed. As a practical consideration, consider all of the big business laws that are being passed today such as the so-called Class Action Fairness Act, the Arbitration Fairness Act, and others. If big business saw a loophole, they could get Congress to close it in days.
This is a terrible practice giving misleading legal advice. I can show you the cases where the attorney was disbarred for making these arguments. I challenge scam artists to show you cases which support the effective assertion of these defenses on as wide a basis as the promotional materials suggest. Do not make the mistake of giving your home away based on a so-called mortgage elimination scheme. The U.S. Government is still pursuing the assets of Andrew Capoccia. See U.S. v. Contents in Account No. 059-644190-69, 253 F. Supp. 2d 789 (Vermont 2003). This is years after the alleged perpetrator was disbarred. Mr. Capoccia filed for bankruptcy with something like 19,000 consumers trying to collect their debts. In re: Capoccia, 292 B.R. 796 (Bankr. Vermont 2003).
Consumers should always seek counsel before surrendering their home. Also, consumers who have been contacted regarding mortgage elimination schemes or who have been defrauded by such schemes, should contact a consumer protection attorney. Your attorney should also provide a copy of the complaint to the FTC Credit Practices Division in Washington, DC
-
I've been in Ky for 20+ years, never heard of them but that doesn't mean they don't exist - they sound like crooks with an affixed, fraudulant Indian identity, small in number with little 'reach'.
-
Just wondering, if any one ever has come across whiteaglsoaring [Allen A. Heart / Allen Henry Becker] and his laughing bird [Shari Fiksdale] as they are both claiming to have native American indian roots, on his website. He does belong to the Little Shell Pempina Band, Just wondering what tribe she belongs to,could she belong to the same tribe.
http://real-dream-catchers.com/Kokopelli_Project/kokopelli_project.htm
Laughing Bird is very much like Kokopelli's Ice Flower. The true Ice Flower intuited our connection to the Kokopelli legend that I had not yet discovered. Like the true Ice Flower in the Kokopelli legend she knew who I was before I arrived. Shortly after, Laughing Bird intuited the password to the storage facility where my storage locker was, she told me the number, and when I punched in the number the gate to my belongings opened. In her presence other doors have opened and the future has opened to us. Laughing Bird is an artist and beams with love and care for people. She is learning to accept and acknowledge her intuitive gifts and she recognizes my gifts and our purpose together.
Laughing Bird has Native American roots as I do, she values the Native American way, and draws from the same source of in-spiration. She knows the power of the Kokopelli Project, how it is beyond anything curently on the planet. She know who we are together, who I am, and who she is. She knows without any drugs or stimulants...just by listening to the sissagwad, the spirit wind in the trees.
The Star Elder has taught that drugs or intoxicating beverages are a blind alley. Those who use them as short cuts to the unknown spiritual purpose of humanity are only finding a short circuit that dead ends nowhere. The ancients, Kokopelli and Ice Flower, probably discovered the power that is natural to the human being... to be transformed by the energy of love attuned by deep passion. The result is a power unmatched in the universe. Kokopelli and Ice Flower knew that the answer is unselfish love and attunement of that love as our natural path to the stars.
-
Found a forum, Quatloos, that keeps tags on militias, tax protesters, and scams surrounding them. They have quite a bit on the Pembinas I hadn't seen before.
----------------
Groups they're tied to.
http://www.quatloos.com/Q-Forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=3927&p=60052&hilit=pembina#p60052
Re: Sovereign Citizens Bust
by Unidyne on Tue Mar 10, 2009 1:10 am
The "tribe" exists solely on paper and has ties to a number of "sovereign" groups.
Shawn Talbot Rice's name appears on a list of people ordained by a group called the "Union of Nazarene Yisraelite Congregations". (http://www.2house.org/page.php?page=registry) They appear to be something along the lines of a "Jews for Jesus" group.
Rice also claims to be a member of the "Messianic Israel Alliance". (http://www.mim.net)
His bio on his website reads:
"Shawn Rice is NOT currently a member of any United States State Bar Association. Shawn Rice is a Law School Graduate and ordained Rabbi.
Shawn Rice teaches law (halacha) at various times to the Jural Society of Torah Assemblies (http://www.JSOTA.com) of Phoenix, Arizona within The Order of Gershom. Shawn Rice is a Legal Advocate of the Ecclesiastical Court of Justice for the religious membership of Society of the Israelite Mosaic Paternal Ethic (SIMPE), Bat Alef Tav, and Tzur Yisrael of Arizona."
There is a website for the Order of Gershom (http://www.gershom.org) but it requires a password to enter. But if you want to join, however, Mr. Rice has graciously provided us with a form:
http://www.riceandassociates.net/Religi ... 050118.doc
Page 1 includes the following: "I, <my name>, hereby request to join the religious Order of Gershom, a body politic separate and apart from the secular world."
This appears to be a quasi-Hebrew themed sovereign citizen/straw-man set up.
Keep tabs on these folks. This could prove to be interesting.
----------------
More ties.
http://www.quatloos.com/Q-Forum/viewtopic.php?f=27&t=2509&p=39782&hilit=pembina#p39782
Re: IMF Decoder shut down
by wserra on Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:30 pm
kipster53 wrote:
I believe Sharon Kukhahn's website was shut down and she opened a new one called http://www.hjrbonds.com.
That certainly appears to be correct. The order forms for both IMF Decoders and hjrbonds have the address 2522 North Proctor, Tacoma, WA (a UPS store), both direct the sucker to make checks/MOs out to "Dream International", and note that the "credt" card (same misspelling in both) listing will be to something called "IRSCB". Both list a telephone - (253) 759-2192 - which appears as well to be that of "Law Researcher" Sharon Kukhahn of the "Ecclesiastical Court of Justice and Law Offices of the Little Shell Pembina Band". So many scams, so few telephones. A whois search of hjrbonds.com shows that it was registered (through a proxy service) in April (and will likely be gone by August).
And I love how their great, unimpeachable authority is James Traficant, Ohio's answer to Bozo the Clown - except that Bozo had better hair.
-----------------
Guy who helped set up the phony tribe.
http://www.quatloos.com/Q-Forum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=4694&p=93469&hilit=pembina#p93469
Re: Elite Activity Resurrected!
by ProfHenryHiggins on Fri Apr 23, 2010 7:47 pm
I have no idea if Michael Howard Reed (note, two "e's") and Joseph Read (note one "e" and one "a") are in any fashion related.
However, Michael Howard Reed was a central figure in the Little Shell Band of the Pembina Indians, and multiple fraudulent micronations based on that non-existent tribe, along with the Gold Quest International Ponzi scheme and trying to force judges to dismiss charges against a group accused of running meth labs.
M.L. Gentry helped him set up the phony tribe, had access to government records (and may possibly have planted a forged treaty document - I haven't been able to prove or disprove that suspicion yet), and commited a surprising amount of Elite Activity's spamming online. Which she did in conjunction with Jean Small, currently on CUA's staff, and that tie to Gentry and Reed puts Small under the same permanent injunction the courts issued against David Greene, Michael Howard Reed, and associates in the GQI case.
----------------
Claims to be lawyer.
http://www.quatloos.com/Q-Forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=3927&p=75529&hilit=pembina#p75529
Re: Sovereign Citizens Bust
by Dezcad on Thu Aug 06, 2009 1:30 pm
Imalawman wrote:
Dezcad wrote:
Check out Notice of Capital Tax Payment and Notice of Non-Abandonment of Escrow Account filed by Shawn in the case.
It also has flow charts attached that I've never seen.
Rabbi and J.D.? is he a Rabbi lawyer?
Rabbi Shawn Talbot Rice, JD is admitted to appear before the courts of The Order of Gershom, a religious order. Rabbi Rice is Authorized to Practice before the Federal Tribal Courts of the Pembina Nation, Pembina License to Practice. He is a graduate of a European law school with a Letter of Law Bachelor (LLB) degree. He has been admitted to a Letter of Law Masters program in the United States and starts that curriculum in the spring of 2009.
http://www.riceandassociates.net/
-
Phony legal document used by a Pembina to try to purchase goods. (Very long)
http://www.quatloos.com/Q-Forum/viewtopic.php?f=27&t=4013&p=61542&hilit=pembina#p61542
Surprise! Non-Negotiable Bills Of Exchange Don't Work!
by The Observer on Fri Mar 27, 2009 10:45 am
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
v.
MICHAEL ALAN REED, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS TRUSTEE OF TWO PONDS.
CHAKRA, INDIGO, CIRCLE PHASE, AND BLACK CANYON PROPERTIES;
LOREN BROWN, AS TRUSTEE OF PEMBINA NATION TRIBAL COUNCIL AND SUNTASSO;
AND JOHN SHERIDAN, AS TRUSTEE OF BLACK CANYON PROPERTIES;
STEVE NELSON, AS TRUSTEE OF CANYON INVESTMENTS;
RAY COX, AS TRUSTEE OF TWO PONDS, CHAKRA, INDIGO, AND CIRCLE PHASE,
Defendants.
Release Date: MARCH 23, 2009
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA
WESTERN DIVISION
AMENDED MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER REGARDING PLAINTIFF'S AND
MICHAEL REED'S CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
A. Procedural Background
B. Factual Background
II. LEGAL ANALYSIS
A. Summary Judgment Standards
B. Analysis Of Issues
1. Defendant Reed's Motion for Summary Judgment
a. Necessity of a response to Reed's answer
b. Reed's "payment" of his tax liabilities
2. The government's Motion for Summary Judgment
a. Federal income tax liabilities
b. Foreclosure of liens
c. Sale of property
III. CONCLUSION
I. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
A. Procedural Background
On October 4, 2007, plaintiff United States ("the government") filed its complaint and on April 10, 2008, filed its amended complaint in this matter seeking to reduce to judgment tax assessments against defendant Michael Reed, to foreclose federal tax liens, to set aside fraudulent conveyances, and to have the proceeds of the foreclosure sales distributed. Both the government and defendant Reed have filed motions for summary judgment in this case (Dkt. Nos. 68 and 75). In his motion, defendant Reed contends, inter alia, that the government is in default because it has not responded to Reed's answer and that he has satisfied his tax liabilities to the government by submitting $ 3,000,000 in payment to the court and the government. The government has filed a timely resistance to defendant Reed's motion.
In its motion for summary judgment, the government asserts that judgment should be entered against defendant Reed for unpaid taxes for the period of 1998 through 2003 and penalties under 26 U.S.C. section 6702 for the period of 1998 through 2003. The government also requests that the court enter judgment declaring that defendants Pembina National Tribal Council and Suntasso have no interest in certain real and personal property. The government further argues in its summary judgment motion that it is entitled to foreclose federal tax liens it has on certain real and personal property which arose as a result of defendant Reed's unpaid federal tax liabilities and apply the proceeds of the sale of that property against Reed's unpaid federal tax liabilities. Defendant Reed has not filed a response to the government's motion.
B. Factual Background
The summary judgment record reveals that the following facts are undisputed.
Defendant Michael Reed has not filed a federal income tax return since 1998. Defendant Reed submitted a 2002 Form 1040 that failed to report his income and 2002 Forms 1099 that reported zero income and purported to rebut previously filed 2002 Forms 1099 submitted to the Internal Revenue Service ("IRS") by third-parties that reported income to defendant Reed in 2002.
Prior to May 13, 1998, defendant Reed held title to real property legally described as:
(1) The West 425 feet of the North 400 feet of the Southeast
Quarter of Section 34, Township 100 North, Range 36 West of the
5th P.M., Dickinson County, Iowa ("the 255th Avenue Property");
(2) Real property legally described as:
Sec/twp/mg/1870-6-8- Legal W 30' of Lot 8 blk 6 Osborne's
Addn. to Spirit Lake, City of Spirit Lake, Dickinson County,
Iowa ("the 19th Street Property")
On May 13, 1998, defendant Reed transferred title to the 255th Avenue Property to Two Ponds for no consideration. On May 13, 1998, defendant Reed transferred title to the 19th Street Property to Circle Phase for no consideration.
In 1999, defendant Reed sent a letter and affidavit to the IRS contesting the applicability of federal income tax to him. Also in 1999, defendant Reed sent to the IRS a "Non-Negotiable Bill of Exchange" in the purported amount of $ 51,635,000. Along with the "Non-Negotiable Bill of Exchange", defendant Reed sent a copy of his birth certificate, indicating that he was born in the United States, driver's license, and social security card.
On August 2, 2002, the IRS sent defendant Reed written notice of the IRS's proposed tax assessments for Reed's unpaid federal income tax liabilities for the period of 1998 through 2002. In October 2002, defendant Reed called the IRS to determine the outstanding balance of his federal tax liabilities for the period of 1998 through 2002. Defendant Reed submitted a check to the IRS dated November 11, 2002, in the amount of $ 260,000 that was drawn on a closed bank account. Defendant Reed also submitted a check to the IRS dated December 18, 2002, in the amount of $ 5,200 that was drawn on a closed bank account. Defendant Reed knew at the time he submitted the checks to the IRS in the amounts of $ 260,000 and $ 5,200 that those checks were drawn on a closed bank account.
On February 11, 2004, the IRS sent a letter to defendant Reed to request the payment of his unpaid federal tax liabilities for the tax years 1998 through 2000. On February 11, 2004, the IRS also sent defendant Reed a letter notifying him that he had not filed a Form 1040 for the 2001 and 2002 tax years. On February 23, 2004, the IRS sent defendant Reed a Notice of Intent to Levy, via certified mail, and informed him of the possibility of filing a Notice of Federal Tax Lien for his unpaid federal tax liabilities for the tax years 1998 through 2000.
Defendant Reed identified Bryan Malatesta as his representative on IRS Form 2848, power of attorney and declaration of representative. On December 29, 2003, Malatesta was enjoined from representing others before the IRS because he sold abusive tax schemes.
On March 11, 2004, the IRS filed a Notice of Federal Lien against defendant Reed. On March 16, 2004, defendant Reed, as a purported trustee of Two Ponds, transferred title to the 255th Avenue Property to Pembina Nation Tribal Council. On March 16, 2004, defendant Reed, as a purported trustee of Circle Phase, transferred title to the 19th Street Property to Pembina Nation Tribal Council. On March 23, 2004, Indigo transferred title to a red and white 1974 GMC truck (VIN: ending in 0221), a blue 2001 Ford pick-up (VIN: ending in 6253), and a silver 2004 Toyota Sequoia (VIN: ending in 7851), to Suntasso. On March 23, 2004, Chakra transferred title to a red 1947 Indian Chief motorcycle (VIN: ending in 5320), a black/red 2002 Indian Chief motorcycle (VIN: ending in 6180), and a red 1991 Harley-Davidson motorcycle (VIN: ending 2735), to Suntasso.
On July 15, 2005, the IRS filed Notices of Federal Tax Liens against Two Ponds, Suntasso, and Pembina Nation Tribal Council as nominees and/or transferees of defendant Reed. On August 5, 2005, defendant Reed sent to IRS Revenue Officer Nancy Alderton a "Complaint" in which he alleged that he was not "a legal term 'taxpayer' 'person' or 'individual' subject to the Internal Revenue Code." On August 22, 2006, Pembina Nation Tribal Council transferred title to the 19th Street Property and the 255th Avenue Property to Black Canyon Properties.
On October 26, 2006, Suntasso transferred title to the red and white 1974 GMC truck, the blue 2001 Ford pick-up, the silver 2004 Toyota Sequoia, the red 1947 Indian Chief motorcycle, the black/red 2002 Indian Chief motorcycle, and the red 1991 Harley-Davidson motorcycle, to Canyon Investments. Pembina Nation Tribal Council and Suntasso, through their purported former trustee, Loren Brown, disclaimed any interest in the subject real estate and personal property.
Defendant Michael Reed has resided at the 255th Avenue Property from 1998 to the present. He does business at the 255th Avenue Property. Defendant Reed used nominee or sham entities, including Black Canyon Properties, Canyon Investments, and Suntasso, to conceal his assets, and to hinder and/or delay the collection of his federal income tax liabilities. Defendant Reed transferred title to the 255th Avenue Property to trust to avoid the collection of his federal income tax liabilities. He transferred title to the 255th Avenue Property to nominee or sham entities, including Black Canyon Properties. Defendant Reed transferred title to the 255th Avenue Property for no or nominal consideration. Defendant Reed still exercises dominion and control over the 255th Avenue Property. Black Canyon Properties holds the 255th Avenue Property as Reed's nominee or alter ego. Defendant Reed continues to personally use the 255th Avenue Property. Defendant Reed is the true, de facto, and equitable owner of the 255th Avenue Property.
Defendant Reed transferred title to the 19th Street Property to avoid the collection of his federal income tax liabilities. He transferred title to the 19th Street Property to nominee or sham entities including Black Canyon Properties. Defendant Reed transferred the title to the 19th Street Property for no or nominal consideration. Defendant Reed, however, still exercises dominion and control over the 19th Street Property. He uses the 19th Street Property for his own personal and business purposes. He continues to personally use the 19th Street Property. Black Canyon Properties holds the 19th Street Property as Reed's nominee or alter ego. Defendant Reed is the true, de facto, and equitable owner of the 19th Street Property.
Defendant Reed transferred title to the red and white 1974 GMC truck, the blue 2001 Ford pick-up, the silver 2004 Toyota Sequoia, the red 1947 Indian Chief motorcycle, the black/red 2002 Indian Chief motorcycle, and the red 1991 Harley-Davidson motorcycle (collectively "the subject personal property"), to trusts to avoid the collection of his federal income tax liabilities. He transferred title to the subject personal property to nominee or sham entities, including Canyon Investments and Suntasso. He transferred the subject real property for no or nominal consideration. Defendant Reed still exercises dominion and control over the subject real property. He continues to use the subject personal property for his own personal and/or business use. Suntasso and Canyon Investments hold the subject personal property as Reed's nominee or alter ego. Defendant Reed is the true, defacto, and equitable owner of the subject personal property.
A delegate of the United States Secretary of the Treasury made proper and timely assessments against and gave notice of and demand for payment from defendant Michael Reed for unpaid federal income taxes, statutory additions and penalties assessed under 26 U.S.C. section 6702 as follows:
Assessment Amount of Unpaid Balance as
Type (Tax Year) Date(s) Assessment of 8/12/2008
_______________________________________________________________________
Form 1040 (1998) 10/6/2003 Est. Tax Penalty- $ 95,818.37
$ 1,637.00
Late Filing
Penalty-$ 8,051.00
Tax-$ 35,785.00
Interest-$ 16,528.57
Failure to Pay
Penalty-$ 8,946.25
Total: $ 70,947.82
Form 1040 (1999) 12/8/2003 Est. Tax Penalty- $ 295,060.30
$ 5,690.00
Late Fling Penalty-
$ 26,453.00
Tax-$ 117,572.00
Interest-$ 40,222.66
Failure to Pay
Penalty-$ 25,865.84
Total: $ 215,803.50
Form 1040 (2000) 12/30/2002 Dishonored Check $ 175,549.07
2/17/2003 Penalty-$ 5,200.00
4/14/2003 Dishonored Check
12/8/2003 Penalty-$ 104.00
Dishonored Check
Penalty-$ 104.30
Est. Tax Penalty-
$ 3,972
Tax-$ 74,365.00
Total: $ 100,475.30
Form 1040 (2001) 11/15/2004 $ 39,329.49 $ 66,984.84
Form 1040 (2002) 11/15/2004 $ 16,959.69 $ 27,327.67
Form 1040 (2003) 11/14/2005 $ 43,357.84 $ 62,292.41
6702 Penalty 5/16/2005 $ 500.00 $ 631.44
(1998)
6702 Penalty 5/16/2005 $ 500.00 $ 631.44
(1999)
6702 Penalty 5/16/2005 $ 500.00 $ 631.44
(2000)
6702 Penalty 5/16/2005 $ 500.00 $ 631.44
(2001)
6702 Penalty 3/28/2005 $ 500.00 $ 636.51
(2002)
6702 Penalty 5/16/2005 $ 500.00 $ 631.44
(2003)
________________________________________
Total: $ 489,873.64 $ 726,826.37
Defendant Reed has not paid the assessed amounts set out above and remains indebted to the government for the unpaid balance plus statutory additions and interest accruing from the dates of assessment. The unpaid balance as of August 12, 2008, including unassessed interest and costs, is $ 726,826.37.
The United States Internal Revenue Service filed with the County Recorder of Dickinson County, Iowa, Notices of Federal Tax Liens relating to the assessments against the following persons and entities:
Date of Notice of
Name of Person Tax Period(s) Federal Tax Lien
or Entity Type of Tax Ending Filed:
______________________________________________________________________
Michael Reed 1040 12/31/1998 3/11/2004
12/31/1999
12/31/2000
Two Ponds (as 1040 12/31/1998 7/15/2005
transferee or 12/31/1999
nominee of 12/31/2000
Michael Reed)
Pembina Nation 1040 12/31/1998 7/15/2005
Tribal Council (as 12/31/1999
transferee or 12/31/2000
nominee of
Michael Reed)
Suntasso (as 1040 12/31/1998 7/15/2005
transferee or 12/31/1999
nominee of 12/31/2000
Michael Reed)
The government seeks to foreclose federal tax liens on the following real and personal property:
(1) The 255th Avenue Property;
(2) the 19th Street Property;
(3) 1947 red Indian Chief motorcycle (VIN: ending in 5320);
(4) 1974 red and white GMC truck (VIN: ending in 0221);
(5) 2002 black/red Indian Chief motorcycle (VIN: ending in 6180);
(6) 2001 blue Ford pick-up (VIN: ending in 6253);
(7) 1991 red Harley-Davidson motorcycle (VIN: ending 2735);
(8) 2004 silver Toyota Sequoia (VIN: ending in 7851); and,
(9) 1971 white Fan motorhome (VIN: ending in 6900).
-
Pt 2 of doc
II. LEGAL ANALYSIS
A. Summary Judgment Standards
Motions for summary judgment essentially "define disputed facts and issues and . . . dispose of unmeritorious claims [or defenses]." Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 127 S. Ct. 1955, 1982 (2007); see Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 323-24 (1986) ("One of the principal purposes of the summary judgment rule is to isolate and dispose of factually unsupported claims or defenses. . . ."). Any party may move for summary judgment regarding "all or any part" of the claims asserted in a case. FED R. CIV. P. 56(a), (b) (allowing a claimant to move for summary judgment "at any time after the expiration of 20 days from the commencement of the action or after service of a motion for summary judgment by the adverse party," and allowing a defending party to move for summary judgment "at any time"). Summary judgment is only appropriate when "the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue of material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law." Id. 56(c) (emphasis added); see Woods v. DaimlerChrysler Corp., 409 F.3d 984, 990 (8th Cir. 2005) ("Summary judgment is appropriate if viewing the record in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party, there are no genuine issues of material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.").
A fact is material when it "'might affect the outcome of the suit under the governing law.'" Johnson v. Crooks, 326 F.3d 995, 1005 (8th Cir. 2003) (quoting Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 248 (1986)). Thus, "the substantive law will identify which facts are material." Anderson, 477 U.S. at 248. Facts that are "critical" under the substantive law are material, while facts that are "irrelevant or unnecessary" are not. Id. An issue of material fact is genuine if it has a real basis in the record, Hartnagel v. Norman, 953 F.2d 394, 395 (8th Cir. 1992) (citing Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp., 475 U.S. 574, 586-87 (1986)), or when "'a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the nonmoving party' on the question," Woods, 409 F.3d at 990 (quoting Anderson, 477 U.S. at 248); see Diesel Machinery, Inc. v. B.R. Lee Indus., Inc., 418 F.3d 820, 832 (8th Cir. 2005) (stating genuineness depends on "whether a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the non-moving party based on the evidence"). Evidence presented by the nonmoving party that only provides "some metaphysical doubt as to the material facts," Matsushita, 475 U.S. at 586, such as a "scintilla of evidence," Anderson, 477 U.S. at 252; In re Temporomandibular Joint (TMJ) Implants Prods. Liab. Litig., 113 F.3d 1484, 1492 (8th Cir. 1997), or evidence that is "merely colorable" or "not significantly probative," Anderson at 249-50, does not make an issue of material fact genuine.
Thus, a genuine issue of material fact is not the "mere existence of some alleged factual dispute between the parties." State Auto. Ins. Co. v. Lawrence, 358 F.3d 982, 985 (8th Cir. 2004). "'Instead, "the dispute must be outcome determinative under prevailing law."'" Mosley v. City of Northwoods, 415 F.3d 908, 910-11 (8th Cir. 2005) (quoting Get Away Club, Inc. v. Coleman, 969 F.2d 664, 666 (8th Cir. 1992), in turn quoting Holloway v. Pigman, 884 F.2d 365, 366 (8th Cir. 1989)). In other words, a genuine issue of material fact requires "sufficient evidence supporting the claimed factual dispute" so as to "require a jury or judge to resolve the parties' differing versions of the truth at trial." Anderson, 477 U.S. at 248-49. Essentially, a genuine issue of material fact determination, and thus the availability of summary judgment, is a determination of "whether a proper jury question [is] presented." Id. at 249. A proper jury question is present if "there is sufficient evidence favoring the nonmoving party for a jury to return a verdict for that party." Id.
Procedurally, the moving party does not have to "support its motion with affidavits or other similar materials negating the opponent's claim," Celotex, 477 U.S. at 323, but the moving party does bear "the initial responsibility of informing the district court of the basis for its motion and identifying those portions of the record which show a lack of a genuine issue." Hartnagel, 953 F.2d at 395 (citing Celotex, 477 U.S. at 323). Thus, a movant need only demonstrate the absence of a genuine issue of material fact and that it is entitled to judgment according to law. See Celotex, 477 U.S. at 323 ("[T]he motion may, and should, be granted so long as whatever is before the district court demonstrates that the standard for the entry of summary judgment, as set forth in Rule 56(c), is satisfied."). Once the moving party has successfully carried its burden under Rule 56(c), the nonmoving party has an affirmative burden to go beyond the pleadings and by depositions, affidavits, or otherwise, designate "specific facts showing that there is a genuine issue for trial." FED. R. CIV. P. 56(e); Mosley, 415 F.3d at 910 ("The nonmoving party may not 'rest on mere allegations or denials, but must demonstrate on the record the existence of specific facts which create a genuine issue for trial.'" (quoting Krenik v. County of Le Sueur, 47 F.3d 953, 957 (8th Cir. 1995))). Thus, the movant must show the absence of a genuine issue of material fact as it relates to the substantive law, and the nonmovant must show the alleged issue of fact is genuine and material as it relates to the substantive law. If a party fails to make a sufficient showing of an essential element of a claim or defense with respect to which that party has the burden of proof, then the opposing party is "entitled to judgment as a matter of law." Celotex, 477 U.S. at 322; In re Temporomandibular Joint, 113 F.3d at 1492.
In considering whether a genuine issue of material fact is present the court must view all the evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party. Matsushita, 475 U.S. at 587-88; Mosley, 415 F.3d at 910. Further, the court must give such party the benefit of all reasonable inferences that can be drawn from the facts. Matsushita, 475 U.S. at 587-88. However, "because we view the facts in the light most favorable to the non-moving party, we do not weigh the evidence or attempt to determine the credibility of the witnesses." Kammueller v. Loomis, Fargo & Co., 383 F.3d 779, 784 (8th Cir. 2004). Rather than "attempt[ing] to determine the truth of the matter . . . the court's function is to determine whether a dispute about a material fact is genuine." Quick v. Donaldson Co., Inc., 90 F.3d 1372, 1376-77 (8th Cir. 1996).
Of course, the facts are not the sole concern of the court; after all, a genuine issue of material fact necessarily depends on the substantive law. See Holloway, 884 F.2d at 366 ("The presence of a genuine issue of fact is predicated on the existence of a legal theory which can be considered viable under the nonmoving party's version of the facts. The mere existence of a factual dispute is insufficient alone to bar summary judgment; rather, the dispute must be outcome determinative under prevailing law."). Thus, the relevant law concerning plaintiff's claims is pivotal. Anderson, 477 U.S. at 252 ("[T]he inquiry involved in a ruling on a motion for summary judgment . . . necessarily implicates the substantive evidentiary standard of proof that would apply at the trial on the merits."); see Brandon v. Lotter, 157 F.3d 537, 539 (8th Cir. 1998) ("'In ruling on a motion for summary judgment, the court must bear in mind the actual quantum and quality of proof necessary to support liability under the applicable law.'" (quoting Hartnagel, 953 F.2d at 396)). Even if no genuine issue of material fact is present, summary judgment is not appropriate unless the governing law supports the moving party's position. FED. R. CIV. P. 56(c) (requiring the moving party to show that it "is entitled to judgment as a matter of law"). Moreover, summary judgment is particularly appropriate "where the unresolved issues are primarily legal rather than factual." Aucutt v. Six Flags Over Mid-America, Inc., 85 F.3d 1311, 1315 (8th Cir. 1996).
With these standards in mind, the court turns to consideration of the parties' cross-motions for summary judgment.
B. Analysis Of Issues
Because there is little overlap in the issues raised in the parties' motions, the court will proceed by addressing the parties' motion seriatim, commencing with defendant Reed's motion.
1. Defendant Reed's Motion for Summary Judgment
a. Necessity of a response to Reed's answer
The first issue the court is called upon to address is defendant Reed's assertion that the government is in default because it has not filed a response to his answer. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 7(a) provides as follows:
(a) Pleadings. Only these pleadings are allowed:
(1) a complaint;
(2) an answer to a complaint;
(3) an answer to a counterclaim designated as a counterclaim;
(4) an answer to a crossclaim;
(5) a third-party complaint;
(6) an answer to a third-party complaint; and
(7) if the court orders one, a reply to an answer.
FED. R. CIV. P. 7(a).
The court notes that defendant Reed's answer did not assert any counterclaims, or crossclaim and the court has not directed the government to reply to defendant Reed's answer. Accordingly, the government was not required to file a reply to defendant Reed's answer and, as such, is not in default. Therefore, this portion of defendant Reed's motion is denied.
b. Reed's "payment" of his tax liabilities
Defendant Reed also contends that he is entitled to summary judgment because he and defendant Raymond Cox, as trustee of Two Ponds, Chakra, Indigo and Circle Phase, have already provided payment to the government in the sum of $ 3,000,000 and therefore his outstanding tax liabilities have been satisfied. The government responds that defendant Reed has merely submitted "bogus 'bonds'" to the government and, therefore, he has not satisfied his federal tax liabilities.
Defendant Reed has attached to his motion for summary judgment copies of the purported "bonds" which he claims satisfied his outstanding federal tax liabilities. These two documents are denominated "Bond to discharge attachment for debt Via Pass-through Account Michael A. Reed ***-**-****" and "Bond to discharge attachment for debt Via Pass-through Account Raymond M. Cox ***-**-****". Both documents purport to be payable on demand "through the back office for settlement via the pass through account . . . at the treasury window, Department of the Treasury, 1500 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W., Washington DC 20220, for the settlement and adjustment of the account enumerated herein." The court concludes that both documents are works of legal fiction, neither of which constitutes a viable financial instrument or represents a recognized legal medium of exchange the tendering of which would satisfy defendant Reed's outstanding federal tax liabilities. See Don E. Williams Co. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 429 U.S. 569, 583 (1977) (holding that "promissory note", even when payable on demand and fully secured, is not the equivalent of a check and does not constitute a medium of exchange). Accordingly, defendant Reed's presentation of these documents to the government failed to satisfy his outstanding federal tax liabilities. Therefore, this portion of defendant Reed's motion is denied.
2. The government's Motion for Summary Judgment
a. Federal income tax liabilities
Section 6321 of the Internal Revenue Code provides that the United States has a lien on all property belonging to an individual who is liable for unpaid taxes. 26 U.S.C. section 6321. See EC Term of Years Trust v. United States, 127 S. Ct. 1763, 1765 (2007); United States v. Craft, 535 U.S. 274, 291 (2002). The Supreme Court has given an expansive reading to this statutory language, stating that it "reveals on its face that Congress meant to reach every interest in property that a taxpayer might have." United States v. Stonehill, 83 F.3d 1156, 1158 (9th Cir. 1996) (citing United States v. National Bank of Commerce, 472 U.S. 713, 719-20 (1985)). Unless another date is fixed by law, a lien imposed under section 6321 arises at the time the tax assessment is made and continues "until the liability for the amount so assessed (or a judgment against the taxpayer arising out of such liability) is satisfied or becomes unenforceable by reason of lapse of time." 26 U.S.C. section 6322; In re Nerland Oil, Inc., 303 F.3d 911, 916 (8th Cir. 2002) ("A federal tax lien attaches and becomes choate at assessment"); United States v. Jepsen, 268 F.3d 582, 584 (8th Cir. 2001) (noting that tax assessment creates a lien in favor of the United States on all property and rights to property pursuant to 26 U.S.C. sections 6321, 6322).
The government asserts that summary judgment should be granted against defendant Reed for the assessments of unpaid taxes and penalties for the tax years 1998 through 2003. For the reasons that follow, the court agrees with the government.
"'In an action to collect federal taxes, the government bears the initial burden of proof.'" In re Olshan, 356 F.3d 1078, 1084 (9th Cir. 2004) (quoting Palmer v. I.R.S., 116 F.3d 1309, 1312 (9th Cir. 1997)); see Carson v. United States, 560 F.2d 693, 696 (5th Cir. 1977). The government's burden can be met by presenting federal tax assessments. United States v. Stonehill, 702 F.2d 1288, 1293 (9th Cir. 1983). Certificates of Assessments and Payments ("Form 4340s") are highly probative and in the absence of contrary evidence, are sufficient to establish a tax assessment was properly made and notice and demand for payment were sent. See United States v. Strebler, 313 F.2d 402, 403-04 (8th Cir. 1963) ("The law is that such assessment is presumptively correct; and 'the burden is on the taxpayer to overcome this presumption' by countervailing proof."); see Huff v. United States, 10 F.3d 1440, 1445 (9th Cir. 1993) ("Generally, courts have held that IRS Form 4340 provides at least presumptive evidence that a tax has been validly assessed. . . ."); Hughes v. United States, 953 F.2d 531, 535 (9th Cir. 1992) ("Official certificates, such as Form 4340, can constitute proof of the fact that the [tax] assessments were actually made.").
When supported by a minimal factual foundation, the IRS's assessments for taxes and related penalties are entitled to a presumption of correctness and the burden shifts to the taxpayer to show the assessment is incorrect. See In re Olshan, 356 F.3d at 1084; see also Palmer, 116 F.3d at 1312; Helvering v. Taylor, 293 U.S. 507, 515 (1935); Avco Delta Corp. Canada Ltd. v. United States, 540 F.2d 258, 262 (7th Cir. 1976); United States v. Rexach, 482 F.2d 10, 17 (1st Cir. 1973); Psaty v. United States, 442 F.2d 1154, 1159-60 (3d Cir. 1971); United States v. Strebler, 313 F.2d 402, 403-04 (8th Cir. 1963). If the taxpayer fails to rebut the presumption, the government is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. See Adams v. United States, 358 F.2d 986, 994 (Ct. Cl. 1966); see also Hansen v. United States, 7 F.3d 137, 138 (9th Cir. 1993) (finding taxpayers' declaration that they did not receive notice of the tax assessment was insufficient to show a genuine issue of fact for trial where IRS presented Form 4340).
Here, the government has submitted Form 4340s calculating defendant Reed's tax liability and the related penalties for 1998 through 2003. See Gov't Ex. 1. Because the government's showing satisfies the minimal factual foundation necessary, the assessments receive a presumption of correctness and the burden of proof shifts to defendant Reed to demonstrate any error. Defendant Reed, however, has not put forth any evidence that there are deficiencies in the government's Form 4340s. In fact, by failing to answer the government's First Set of Admissions, defendant Reed has admitted that he owes taxes and penalties in the exact amounts stated in the IRS's assessments. See Luick v. Graybar Elec. Co., 473 F.2d 1360, 1361-62 (8th Cir. 1973) ("Unanswered requests for admissions render the matter requested conclusively established for the purpose of that suit."); Essex Ins. Co. v. McManus, 299 F. Supp. 2d 939, 942 (E.D. Mo. 2003) (quoting Luick). Since defendant Reed has failed to identify any facts that would rebut the legitimacy of the 4340s, the only permissible inference is that the assessments of defendant Reed's tax liability are valid as a matter of law. See Adams, 358 F.2d at 994. Accordingly, the court finds that the assessments of defendant Reed's tax liability and penalties for the tax years 1998 through 2003 are correct as a matter of law. Therefore, the court grants the government's motion for summary judgment against defendant Reed for the federal tax assessments made against him for tax years 1998 through 2003.
Pursuant to 26 U.S.C. sections 6601(a) and (e)(2)(A), 6621, and 6622, the United States is entitled to statutory interest on income taxes and associated penalties imposed as of the date of notice and demand, which accrues daily until paid in full. See Purcell v. United States, 1 F.3d 932, 943 (9th Cir. 1993). Once a court validates a tax assessment, awarding statutory interest is mandatory. See id. (noting that section 6601(e)(2)(A) is a "binding statutory directive" to award interest). Therefore, the court grants summary judgment with respect to the statutory interest and penalties on the assessments for tax years 1998 through 2003 and orders that judgment be entered against defendant Reed in the amount of $ 726,826.37 for those income tax liabilities, associated penalties and interest plus statutory additions accruing from August 12, 2008.
b. Foreclosure of liens
Defendant Reed's Federal Tax Liens attached to the following property prior to Reed's conveyance of them to other entities:
(1) The 255th Avenue Property;
(2) the 19th Street Property;
(3) 1947 red Indian Chief motorcycle (VIN: ending in 5320);
(4) 1974 red and white GMC truck (VIN: ending in 0221);
(5) 2002 black/red Indian Chief motorcycle (VIN: ending in 6180);
(6) 2001 blue Ford pick-up (VIN: ending in 6253);
(7) 1991 red Harley-Davidson motorcycle (VIN: ending 2735);
(8) 2004 silver Toyota Sequoia (VIN: ending in 7851); and,
(9) 1971 white Fan motorhome (VIN: ending in 6900).
Pursuant to 26 U.S.C. section 6321, after notice and demand, the United States obtains a lien "upon all property and rights to property, whether real or personal, belonging to" the taxpayer in the amount of the unpaid taxes, penalties, and interest. A lien arises as of the date of the assessment and continues until paid. See 26 U.S.C. section 6322. The United States's tax liens are perfected upon assessment, see United States v. Vermont, 377 U.S. 351, 355 (1964), and are effective against the taxpayer and other lienholders without filing notice. See 26 U.S.C. sections 6321, 6323(a). For a tax lien to be valid against a purchaser, however, the United States must file a notice of the lien in the appropriate location more than thirty days prior to the sale. See 26 U.S.C. sections 6323(b), (f); 7425(b) (stating that nonjudicial sale of property is subject to United States's lien if notice was filed or recorded in the proper location more than thirty days before such sale). The first of Reed's Federal Tax Liens was perfected and, therefore, became valid on October 6, 2003-the date of assessment of Reed's 1998 tax liability. See Gov't Ex. 1. The next two Federal Tax Liens were perfected on December 8, 2003-the date of assessment of Reed's 1999 and 2000 year tax liabilities. See Gov't Ex. 1. Thus, the Federal Tax Liens attached to the property described above prior to any transfer of the title to that property and, accordingly, the transferees took the property subject to the government's liens./1/ Therefore, the court orders that defendant Reed's Federal Tax Liens be foreclosed on the the following property:
(1) The 255th Avenue Property;
(2) the 19th Street Property;
(3) 1947 red Indian Chief motorcycle (VIN: ending in 5320);
(4) 1974 red and white GMC truck (VIN: ending in 0221);
(5) 2002 black/red Indian Chief motorcycle (VIN: ending in 6180);
(6) 2001 blue Ford pick-up (VIN: ending in 6253);
(7) 1991 red Harley-Davidson motorcycle (VIN: ending 2735);
(8) 2004 silver Toyota Sequoia (VIN: ending in 7851); and,
(9) 1971 white Fan motorhome (VIN: ending in 6900).
c. Sale of property
Pursuant to 26 U.S.C. section 7403, the United States may enforce a lien by commencing an action in the district court, joining all parties with an interest in the property, and obtaining a judicial sale of the property. See United States v. Rodgers, 461 U.S. 677, 691-92 (1983) (stating that section 7403 grants the power to a federal district court to order the sale of a delinquent taxpayer's home); United States v. Bierbrauer, 936 F.3d 373, 374 (8th Cir. 1991) (noting that "ection 7403 of the Internal Revenue Code authorizes a federal district court to order a sale of property in which a delinquent taxpayer has an interest in order to satisfy that taxpayer's debt".); see also In re Pletz, 221 F.3d at 1118 (citing Rodgers, 461 U.S. at 693-94). Section 7403(c) states, in pertinent part, that
[t]he court shall, after the parties have been duly notified of
the action, proceed to adjudicate all matters involved therein
and finally determine the merits of all claims to and liens upon
the property, and, in all cases where a claim or interest of the
United States therein is established, may decree a sale of such
property, by the proper officer of the court, and a distribution
of the proceeds of such sale according to the findings of the
court in respect to the interests of the parties and of the
United States.
26 U.S.C. section 7403(c).
Under section 7403(c), "in order to enforce a lien and collect on justly owed debts, the district court is empowered to order the sale of [entireties] property to satisfy the tax debt of one tenant, so long as it compensates the nondebtor spouse for his or her interest." In re Pletz, 221 F.3d at 1117-18 (noting that section 7403 "explicitly allows a lien creditor like the IRS to sell not only a debtor's interest in a property, but the entire property held as a tenancy by the entirety by the debtor and his nondebtor wife"); see also Rodgers, 461 U.S. at 680 (observing that a federal district court is empowered to order sale of the property itself, not just the delinquent taxpayer's interest in the property). Here, the government has complied with section 7403. Defendant Reed has refused to pay his federal tax liabilities, and as a result, this court has foreclosed the federal tax liens against the real and personal property identified above. The government commenced this action in the district court and all parties "having liens upon or claiming any interest in the property involved in such action" at the time of filing have been named as defendants. Accordingly, pursuant to section 7403, the court orders the sale of the following real and personal property to satisfy defendant Reed's federal tax liens:
(1) The 255th Avenue Property;
(2) the 19th Street Property;
(3) 1947 red Indian Chief motorcycle (VIN: ending in 5320);
(4) 1974 red and white GMC truck (VIN: ending in 0221);
(5) 2002 black/red Indian Chief motorcycle (VIN: ending in 6180);
(6) 2001 blue Ford pick-up (VIN: ending in 6253);
(7) 1991 red Harley-Davidson motorcycle (VIN: ending 2735);
(8) 2004 silver Toyota Sequoia (VIN: ending in 7851); and,
(9) 1971 white Fan motorhome (VIN: ending in 6900).
III. CONCLUSION
For the reasons stated above, because the court denies defendant Reed's Motion for Summary Judgment and grants the government's Motion for Summary Judgment and orders the following: that judgment be entered against defendant Reed in the amount of $ 726,826.37 for those income tax liabilities, associated penalties and interest plus statutory additions accruing from August 12, 2008; that defendant Reed's federal tax liens be foreclosed on the following real and personal property:
(1) The 255th Avenue Property;
(2) the 19th Street Property;
(3) 1947 red Indian Chief motorcycle (VIN: ending in 5320);
(4) 1974 red and white GMC truck (VIN: ending in 0221);
(5) 2002 black/red Indian Chief motorcycle (VIN: ending in 6180);
(6) 2001 blue Ford pick-up (VIN: ending in 6253);
(7) 1991 red Harley-Davidson motorcycle (VIN: ending 2735);
(8) 2004 silver Toyota Sequoia (VIN: ending in 7851); and,
(9) 1971 white Fan motorhome (VIN: ending in 6900);
and the sale of that real and personal property.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED this 23rd day of March, 2009.
Mark W. Bennett
U. S. District Court Judge
Northern District of Iowa
FOOTNOTE
/1/ The court concludes, based on the disclaimer of interest filed by Loren Brown, in his capacity as trustee of Suntasso and Pembina Nation Tribal Council, that defendants Suntasso and Pembina Nation Tribal Council have no interest in the above mentioned real and personal property. Similarly, the court finds that defendants Black Canyon Properties and Canyon Investments hold the real and personal property transferred to them by defendant Reed as nominees or alter egos of defendant Reed. Accordingly, the government's federal tax liens against defendant Reed attached to the real and personal property held by these entities which Reed transferred to them in this capacity.
ed: SSAN redacted (JRB)
other SSN redacted (Q)
-
Robert Sumner of Charlotte County Florida is at it again. Read the story from June 25, 2010 Sarasota Herald Tribune
http://www.heraldtribune.com/article/20100725/ARTICLE/7251034/2066/NEWS?p=1&tc=pg&tc=ar
Tribal claims causing Charlotte controversy
Robert Sumner, 74, says he is a member of the Pembina Nation Little Shell Band of North America, a group the Anti-Defamation League describes as a fake tribe.
By CHRIS GERBASI Correspondent
Published: Sunday, July 25, 2010 at 1:00 a.m.
Last Modified: Saturday, July 24, 2010 at 7:37 p.m.
( page 1 of 2 )
PUNTA GORDA - A code violation dispute in Charlotte County has highlighted a national trend of individuals claiming that membership in a purported Native American tribe makes them exempt from U.S. laws.
Charlotte County attorneys plan to seek an injunction to force Robert Chancey Sumner to correct building and zoning violations at his residence and auto junkyard on Taylor Road in Punta Gorda. Sumner says he is a member of a legitimate tribe -- the Pembina Nation Little Shell Band of North America. The Anti-Defamation League, however, describes it as a fake tribe concocted by anti-government extremists to help them avoid paying taxes and other fees.
Mark Pitcavage is director of investigative research for the New York-based ADL, which monitors extremist groups. He said the Little Shell Pembina Band of North America, as he refers to it, was created by Ronald K. Delorme of North Dakota. In 2001, Delorme claimed Indian ancestry and sued the U.S. government for appropriations, but the case was dismissed and the group is not a federally recognized tribe, he said. Pitcavage says that in 2003, Delorme's band became a sovereign citizen group, accepting members for a small fee whether they have Indian ancestry or not.
"It's completely dysfunctional," Pitcavage said. "Anybody can now claim they're in the group."
He said that while there are no concentrated numbers of the Pembina group anywhere in the United States, individual members are popping up everywhere. Members create bogus license plates and IDs, and are often involved in mortgage and insurance fraud, Pitcavage said, sometimes leading to confrontations over traffic stops or property.
In May, John C. McCombs, 59, of Punta Gorda was pulled over on his motorcycle when a deputy spotted a Pembina Nation license plate, according to news reports. McCombs showed the deputy a Pembina Nation vehicle registration and a letter of diplomatic immunity; both are considered invalid. He will face three traffic charges at a pretrial hearing on Aug. 17. Sheriff's spokesman Bob Carpenter said there have been few other local incidents involving the Pembina group.
Sumner, 74, who described himself as a "half-breed" with Indian blood, said he joined the Pembina Nation 10 to 15 years ago. Sumner has no arrest record in the sheriff's database and pays his property taxes, according to county staff. Through his legal representative, he also disavowed any connections to extremists or members who perpetrate scams.
County attorney Janette Knowlton said Sumner's tribal claims are incidental to the code case. According to Pitcavage, however, Sumner's actions suggest he is a member of the sovereign citizen movement, a sometimes violent movement that has a 40-year history in the United States.
Sumner ignored county notices when he was first cited for code violations in 2005. After a sheriff's raid confiscated 32 cars from his property in 2006, Sumner sued in Federal Tribal Circuit Court and was awarded damages. He then filed judgment liens against properties belonging to Knowlton and other county staff and officials, requiring the county to get a court order to have the liens removed.
Sumner now faces violations involving mobile homes on property not zoned for them, and illegal or improper utility hookups.
But he is no longer claiming sovereignty from county ordinances, said Damian Panno, a North Port paralegal representing Sumner. He said Sumner believed he was entitled to the sovereign property rights of a reservation tribe, and that a 1974 U.S. Supreme Court ruling recognizes the Pembina band as an independent tribe.
-
It appears that they are all made of the brush of dishonesty and scams,this is the latest how A.A. Heart aka Whiteaglesoaring is trying to convince how honest and helpful he is. He is playing on the heart strings of vulnerable people. If he is so sincere and doing it as a labor of love, why is he charging a commission from people that can least afford it, and getting them deeper into debt, that does not bother him and is insulting people's intelligence.
Below is part of what is on his website,s
http://www.real-debt-elimination.com/index.htm
This website, www.real-debt-elimination.com is intended not just as a quickie course of study, with glib answers and patchwork procedures. It's more than a curriculum. It's a library of information that you can use to help you get ready to get out of debt and discover real freedom. It's also not a scam. If I were a scam artist, I wouldn't have devoted this much time and effort for a fly-by-night operation. It's taken me nearly three years to get this far after 5 years of work had been stolen by a dishonest partner. The scammers are those who say that debt elimination is a scam. This is a labor of love. Freedom is a precious experience and our families are precious, too. This is a work dedicated to my children and grandchildren and yours, too. We have a lot of work to do, but I hope you can take it on playfully as a world of freedom and choice opens to you. To make this possible, you must open to it! Do yourself and the rest of America a favor...eliminate credit card debt, eliminate student loan debt, discover tax freedom, and speed equity growth in your home by discovering WHO you REALLY are.
Come soar with the White Eagle.