United States v. Bank of America National Trust & S. Ass'n

Decision Date18 May 1964
Docket NumberCiv. No. 426-61.
Citation229 F. Supp. 906
CourtU.S. District Court — Southern District of California
PartiesUNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. BANK OF AMERICA NATIONAL TRUST AND SAVINGS ASSOCIATION, a national banking association, Defendant.

Francis C. Whelan, U. S. Atty., for the Southern District of California, by Loyal E. Keir, Asst. U. S. Atty., Chief, Tax Section, and Herbert D. Sturman, Asst. U. S. Atty., Los Angeles, Cal., for plaintiff.

Hugo A. Steinmeyer, Robert H. Fabian and Alfred T. Twigg, Los Angeles, Cal., for defendant.

CLARKE, District Judge.

This action involves priority of claims to funds in a taxpayer's bank accounts. The United States asserts a lien right; and the defendant bank asserts a statutory right of setoff. There is no dispute as to the facts, both parties having moved for summary judgment.

The taxpayer, J. B. Edmondson, maintained accounts with defendant bank at a branch office in Fullerton, Orange County, California. The accounts stood in the taxpayer's own name and in certain business names. For aught that appears in the record, the businesses were sole proprietorships. The accounts have been treated by the parties as being those of the individual taxpayer, and this Court shall so treat them.

The taxpayer became indebted to the United States for withholding and F.I. C.A. (Social Security) taxes for the first, second and third quarters of 1955. Notices of the various assessments were given, and demands for payment made of the taxpayer, in accordance with applicable provisions of the Internal Revenue Code. Notice of lien for the first assessment was filed in Orange County, California, October 19, 1955; notices as to the two other assessments were filed in Orange County January 28, 1958.

On August 27, 1959, the district director of Internal Revenue served upon defendant a notice of levy upon all property or rights of property belonging to the taxpayer. By this notice, demand was made of defendant for $12,219.09, this being a portion of the amount defendant then owed the taxpayer. Defendant had no actual knowledge of the existence of the assessments, nor of any United States tax lien against the taxpayer's property, prior to service of this notice.

The district director served final demand upon defendant September 25, 1959. Defendant has refused to pay any of the amount to the Government.

On the date of the notice of levy, the taxpayer's accounts with defendant bank showed total credits of $6,658.31. This figure included amounts credited to Edmondson for deposits during the preceding 30 days of part of the proceeds of various checks drawn on other banks. At the time of such levy, the taxpayer was indebted to the bank in the amount of $11,570.40 upon the following instruments:

Conditional sale contract, dated March 18, 1958, for purchase of an automobile, which contract was assigned by the seller to defendant March 26, 1958.
Conditional sale contract, dated March 19, 1959, for purchase of an automobile, which contract was assigned by the seller to defendant March 19, 1959.
Conditional sale contract, dated March 20, 1959, for purchase of an automobile, which contract was assigned by the seller to defendant March 20, 1959.
Conditional sale contract, dated September 5, 1958, for purchase of an automobile, which contract was assigned by the seller to defendant September 5, 1958.
Conditional sale contract, dated December 10, 1958, for purchase of an automobile, which contract was assigned by the seller to defendant December 10, 1958.
Promissory note, dated April 21, 1959, payable to the order of defendant, in the amount of $1,200.00, which instrument was payable on demand, or, if no demand were made, on June 19, 1959.
Promissory note, dated May 26, 1959, payable to the order of defendant, in the amount of $1,284.00, secured by a mortgage upon a boat.

With exception of the demand note, each of these instruments contained an acceleration clause providing that in the event of default, all sums unpaid should, at the option of the creditor, immediately become due and owing.

As of the date of the levy, no demand had been made for payment of the demand note, nor had any payment been made thereon. On each of the other instruments there was an installment past due which had not been paid.

The day following the notice of levy, the bank made bookkeeping entries charging the taxpayer's accounts with the sum of $6,658.31 (the entire amount on deposit) and crediting this sum against the balances due on the various instruments as follows:

                              A. On conditional sale contracts for cars
                              Balances     Credit Given for   Distribution  Balances
                                due        Unearned Portion   of             After
                Car           8-27-59      of Finance Charge  $6,658.31     Entries
                1959 Chev.   $1,853.68          $132.33       $1,721.35        Ø
                1959 Ford     2,125.14            52.14        2,073.00        Ø
                1957 Cad.     2,842.02                           367.88    $2,474.14
                1959 Ford     2,205.12                          none        2,205.12
                1956 Ford       135.30                           135.30        Ø
                             _________          ________      _________    __________
                             $9,161.25          $184.47       $4,297.53    $4,679.26
                         B.  On boat mortgage
                             $1,179.14          $ 48.46       $1,130.68        Ø
                        C.  On unsecured note
                            $1,230.10                         $1,230.10        Ø
...

To continue reading

Request your trial
9 cases
  • United States v. Sterling National Bank & T. Co. of NY, 72 Civ. 1533.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York
    • June 5, 1973
    ...251 F.2d 820 (9th Cir., 1958), cert. denied, 356 U.S. 938, 78 S. Ct. 780, 2 L.Ed.2d 813, and United States v. Bank of America National Trust & Savings Ass'n, 229 F.Supp. 906 (S.D.Cal., 1964), aff'd 345 F.2d 624 (9th Cir., 1965), cert. denied, 382 U.S. 927, 86 S.Ct. 534, 15 L.Ed.2d 340 (1965......
  • United States v. Harris
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Western District of Louisiana
    • January 14, 1966
    ...States, 251 F.2d 820 (9 Cir. 1958), cert. denied 356 U.S. 938, 78 S.Ct. 780, 2 L.Ed.2d 813, and United States v. Bank of America National Trust & Savings Ass'n, 229 F.Supp. 906 (S.D.Calif.1964), aff'd 345 F.2d 624 (9 Cir. In Bank of Nevada the taxpayer, prior to the assessment, submitted a ......
  • United States v. St. Johns Community Bank
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Missouri
    • June 10, 1969
    ...the Ninth Circuit in Bank of America National Trust and Savings Ass'n v. United States, 345 F.2d 624 (9th Cir. 1965), affirming 229 F.Supp. 906 (S.D.Cal.1964), and in Bank of Nevada v. United States, 251 F.2d 820 (9th Cir. 1957), affirming 155 F. Supp. 164 (D.Nev.1957). The Court denied set......
  • United States v. Sterling National Bank & T. Co. of NY
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit
    • March 27, 1974
    ...820, 824 (9th Cir. 1957), cert. denied, 356 U.S. 938, 78 S.Ct. 780, 2 L.Ed.2d 813 (1958); United States v. Bank of America National Trust & Savings Association, 229 F. Supp. 906, 909 (S.D.Cal.1964), aff'd per curiam, 345 F.2d 624 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 382 U.S. 927, 86 S.Ct. 316, 15 L.Ed......
  • 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