United States v. First National City Bank, M 18 304.
| Decision Date | 31 December 1974 |
| Docket Number | No. M 18 304.,M 18 304. |
| Citation | 388 F. Supp. 1044 |
| Parties | UNITED STATES of America, Petitioner, v. FIRST NATIONAL CITY BANK and Chemical Bank New York Trust Company, Respondents. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York |
Paul J. Curran, U. S. Atty., Southern District of New York, for petitioner; William Roche Bronner, Asst. U. S. Atty., of counsel.
Shearman & Sterling, New York City, for First National City Bank; Matthew C. Gruskin, New York City, of counsel.
John B. Wynne, New York City, for Chemical Bank New York Trust Company.
R. Kenly Webster, Washington, D. C., and Neal J. Hurwitz, New York City, for Milton F. Meissner.
Petitioner moves for an order permitting agents of the Director of International Operations of the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to have access to certain safe deposit boxes located in respondents' offices. Milton F. Meissner moves for an order permitting him to intervene in this proceeding.
It appears that on April 1, 1974 this court issued an order for the arrest of Milton F. Meissner for failing to appear before a grand jury pursuant to an order of this court. At that time, Mr. Meissner was not present in the United States and he has remained out of this country ever since.
On April 9, 1974, the Director of International Operations of the IRS made a jeopardy assessment against Milton F. Meissner for income taxes due and owing for the tax years 1970 and 1971, pursuant to 26 U.S.C. § 6851(a). Soon thereafter, the taxpayer was given notice of the assessment and payment was demanded.
On April 10, 1974, notices of levy and seizure were served upon respondent First National City Bank with regard to its safe deposit box number 50 at Madison Avenue and 42nd Street in New York City, and respondent Chemical Bank New York Trust Company with regard to its safe deposit box number 238 at 79th Street and York Avenue, also in New York City. Both of these boxes are in Mr. Meissner's name.
Petitioner contends that these safe deposit boxes contain property belonging to Mr. Meissner and that its tax lien has attached to that property. It asserts that, although respondents have sealed the boxes in question, they have refused, in violation of 26 U.S.C. § 6332, to surrender the property in those boxes which the government seeks to reach in satisfaction of the unpaid taxes. Conceding that the safe deposit boxes cannot be opened by usual means, petitioner agrees to bear any expense occasioned by forcible opening of the boxes.
Jurisdiction is invoked under 26 U.S.C. § 7402, which authorizes us to issue orders which "may be necessary or appropriate for the enforcement of the internal revenue laws." A summary proceeding is appropriate here, since petitioner does not seek a determination of a property right but merely access to property so that it may seize it following levy, as authorized by 26 U.S.C. § 6326. See generally, New Hampshire Fire Ins. Co. v. Scanlon, 362 U.S. 404, 80 S.Ct. 843, 4 L.Ed.2d 826 (1960).
Mr. Meissner seeks to intervene in this proceeding, presumably under Rule 19, Fed.R.Civ.P. If permitted to intervene, he seeks to oppose entry into the boxes on the ground that the government is investigating him with a view to criminal prosecution and to contend that the obtaining of evidence from the safe deposit boxes would constitute an illegal seizure, in violation of his rights under the Fourth Amendment.
Rule 19 compels joinder of a party claiming an interest "relating to the subject of the action," if his nonjoinder would "impair or impede his ability to protect that interest." A determination of the matter before us will in no way impair or impede Mr. Meissner's ability to protect his interests. The Internal Revenue Code permits the taxpayer to sue for a refund if his tax has been...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
United States v. NEW ENGLAND MERCHANTS NAT.
...to give it "possession" of the contents of the box for purposes of applying 26 U.S.C. § 6332(a). See United States v. First National City Bank, S.D.N.Y.1974, 388 F.Supp. 1044, 145-46, aff'd, 2 Cir. 1977, 568 F.2d 853; cf., Carples v. Cumberland Coal & Iron Co., 1945, 240 N.Y. 187, 148 N.E. ......
-
U.S. v. First Nat. City Bank
...National City Bank (Citibank) appeal from orders entered in the Southern District of New York, Lloyd F. MacMahon, District Judge, 388 F.Supp. 1044, (1) denying Meissner's motion for leave to intervene in pre-seizure summary proceedings to enforce levies on the contents of his safe deposit b......
-
Kwasnik v. Maine Department of Health & Human Services
... ... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES and BANK OF AMERICA Respondents No. AP-11-011 Superior ... (R. D-3.) ... As of January 18, 2011, the Petitioner owed $93, 405.01. (R ... Amendment and Due Process Clause to the United States ... Constitution and Article I, ... City of ... Dallas, 242 F.3d 642, 648 (5th Cir ... inapposite ... First, ... DHHS cites G.M. Leasing Corp. v ... The issue ... before the First National City Bank court was ... whether the debtor ... ...
-
Kwasnik v. Maine Dep't of Health & Human Servs.
...outside of the safe-deposit box, it is no less subject to attachment when put into the box. U.S. v. First Nat 7 City Bank & Chemical Bank NY Trust Co., 388 F. Supp. 1044, 1046 (1974), aff'd 568 F.2d 853 (2d Cir. 1977); Carples v. Cumberland Coal & Iron Co., 148 N.E. 185, 187 (N.Y. 1925). Th......