From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Nesbitt v. United States

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Jun 26, 1980
622 F.2d 433 (9th Cir. 1980)

Opinion

No. 78-2111.

June 26, 1980.

Franklin J. Flocks, Palo Alto, Cal., for plaintiff-appellant.

Joan. I. Oppenheimer, Washington, D.C., for defendants-appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California; Charles B. Renfrew, Judge.

Before SNEED and POOLE, Circuit Judges, and PFAELZER, District Judge.

Honorable Mariana R. Pfaelzer, United States District Judge for the Central District of California, sitting by designation.


Appellant appeals from a summary judgment of the district court granting priority to the United States' tax lien claims over the judgment lien claim of the appellant. Both appellant and appellee agree that but for the provisions of Revised Statutes § 3466, 31 U.S.C. § 191, appellant would be entitled to priority. The district court held that section 3466 was applicable, with the consequence that the United States was entitled to priority, and that the appellant's lien was not excepted from the operation of section 3466. We affirm.

The reasons for our affirmance were stated quite well in the district court's opinion which appears in 445 F. Supp. 824 (N.D. Cal. 1978). We adopt Judge Renfrew's opinion to the extent of Parts I, II, and III.A. As to Part III.B, we merely wish to hold that, to the extent an exception to section 3466 might exist for "perfected and specific liens," the lien of the appellant was not sufficiently perfected and specific to come within any such exception.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Nesbitt v. United States

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Jun 26, 1980
622 F.2d 433 (9th Cir. 1980)
Case details for

Nesbitt v. United States

Case Details

Full title:MARIE D. NESBITT, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; SAFECO…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Jun 26, 1980

Citations

622 F.2d 433 (9th Cir. 1980)

Citing Cases

United States v. Estate of Romani

" § 6323(f)(1)(B). The decision of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court conflicts with two federal court of appeals…