Stoecklin v. U.S.

Decision Date25 September 1991
Docket NumberNo. 90-3277,90-3277
Citation943 F.2d 42
Parties-5631, 91-2 USTC P 50,520 Kenneth A. STOECKLIN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Defendant-Appellee.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Eleventh Circuit

Ralph J. Lee, Asst. U.S. Atty., Jacksonville, Fla., Gary R. Allen, Chief, Appellate Section, Kevin M. Brown, Richard Farber, Joel A. Rabinovitz, William S. Estabrook, Tax Div., U.S. Dept. of Justice, Washington, D.C., for defendant-appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida.

Before ANDERSON and DUBINA, Circuit Judges, and ESCHBACH *, Senior Circuit Judge.

DUBINA, Circuit Judge:

In this appeal, the appellant, Kenneth A. Stoecklin ("Stoecklin"), requests this court to vacate the district court's dismissal of his complaint against the Internal Revenue Service ("IRS") for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. We find that the district court had subject matter jurisdiction; accordingly, we vacate the district court's order and remand this case for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

I. BACKGROUND

The IRS issued notices of deficiency for the years 1978-1983 which Stoecklin contested. The deficiencies were upheld by the tax court and affirmed by this court. 1 Taxes were assessed against Stoecklin, after which the IRS filed notices of tax liens on certain real and personal property owned by Stoecklin. Finally, the IRS assessed notices of levy to attempt to collect Stoecklin's taxes.

Stoecklin filed suit against the United States in an effort to quiet title to the property against which the government had assessed its notices of levy. 2 Stoecklin contends that the liens the government placed on his property were invalid because the government had not formally assessed the taxes due, because it had not issued a notice of assessment and demand for payment, and because it had not issued a final notice and demand (notice of intention to levy). Stoecklin also added a claim under § 7431 of the Internal Revenue Code ("IRC") for damages due to the alleged unauthorized disclosure of his tax return information in violation of § 6103 of the IRC. The United States filed a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, which the district court granted. Stoecklin then perfected this appeal.

II. DISCUSSION

The United States is immune from suit unless it consents to be sued. United States v. Testan, 424 U.S. 392, 399, 96 S.Ct. 948, 953, 47 L.Ed.2d 114 (1976). Title 28 U.S.C. § 2410 provides, in pertinent part, that "the United States may be named a party in any civil suit in any district court ... to quiet title to ... real and personal property on which the United States has or claims a mortgage or other lien."

This circuit has not addressed whether a taxpayer may rely on the waiver in § 2410 as a basis for jurisdiction to challenge a federal tax lien. Other jurisdictions that have addressed the issue have permitted taxpayers to challenge the procedural validity of a federal tax lien under § 2410. See McCarty v. United States, 929 F.2d 1085, 1087-88 (5th Cir.1991); Robinson v. United States, 920 F.2d 1157, 1161 (3rd Cir.1990); Schmidt v. King, 913 F.2d 837, 839 (10th Cir.1990); Elias v. Connett, 908 F.2d 521, 527 (9th Cir.1990); Pollack v. United States, 819 F.2d 144, 145 (6th Cir.1987). A taxpayer cannot, however, challenge the merits of the underlying assessment. McCarty, 929 F.2d at 1088; Robinson, 920 F.2d at 1161; Schmidt, 913 F.2d at 839; Elias, 908 F.2d at 528; Pollack, 819 F.2d at 145. We agree with these circuits that a taxpayer may challenge the procedural validity of a federal tax lien under § 2410. In the present case, Stoecklin alleges that the United States did not follow the proper procedures in procuring the liens against his property. Therefore, Stoecklin's lawsuit challenging the procedural validity of the federal tax liens falls under the waiver of sovereign immunity outlined in § 2410.

III. CONCLUSIO...

To continue reading

Request your trial
16 cases
  • Felkel v. US
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of South Carolina
    • May 5, 1994
    ...Bar & Lounge, Inc. v. United States, 539 F.2d 935, 937 (3d Cir.1976); Elias v. Connett, 908 F.2d 521 (9th Cir.1990); Stoecklin v. United States, 943 F.2d 42 (11th Cir.1991). Notwithstanding Felkel's assertions that the seizure and sale of his property for delinquent taxes was procedurally i......
  • James v. U.S.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Tenth Circuit
    • July 23, 1992
    ...jurisdiction over a quiet title action." Schmidt, 913 F.2d at 839; see also Lonsdale, 919 F.2d at 1443; accord Stoecklin v. United States, 943 F.2d 42, 43 (11th Cir.1991); Arford v. United States, 934 F.2d 229, 232 (9th Cir.1991); McCarty v. United States, 929 F.2d 1085, 1087-88 (5th Cir.19......
  • First Cmty. Bank v. Walthall
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Middle District of Alabama
    • April 5, 2019
    ...or personal property on which the United States has or claims a mortgage or other lien.' 28 U.S.C. § 2410(a)."); Stoecklin v. United States, 943 F.2d 42, 42 (11th Cir. 1991) ("In this appeal, the appellant, Kenneth A. Stoecklin ('Stoecklin'), requests this court to vacate the district court......
  • Bufkin v. United States
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Eleventh Circuit
    • June 14, 2013
    ...of a federal tax lien, but "cannot . . . challenge the merits of the underlying assessment") (emphasis added); Stoecklin v. United States, 943 F.2d 42, 43 (11th Cir. 1991). Otherwise, the Tax Court has jurisdiction over challenges to an IRS determination of income tax liability. See 26 U.S.......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT