Bank of America, N.A. v. Department of the Treasury - Internal Revenue Service et al
Bank of America, N.A. |
Department of the Treasury - Internal Revenue Service, Does, David Quandt, Joan Woodlock and Robert Woodlock |
2:2016cv09361 |
December 19, 2016 |
US District Court for the Central District of California |
Manuel L. Real |
Karen L. Stevenson |
Taxes |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 12 ORDER RE JUDGMENT by Judge Manuel L. Real. JUDGMENT IS HEREBY ORDERED, pursuant to the stipulation as follows: 1. The deed of trust in favor of Bank of America (BOA) in the amount of $580,992.00, recorded on October 26, 2009, in the Los Angel es County Recorder's Office as Instrument No 20091612270 (2009 BOA DOT) is in first priority position against thE property, commonly known as 4040 Trinidad Road, Woodland Hills, California 91364 and designated as Assessor's Parcel Number (APN) 2172-028-030 (the Subject Property). 2. The Notice of Federal Tax Lien recorded on or about May 21, 2009, for a tax assessment totaling $35,165.39 as of that date, and which indicated the name of the taxpayer as Robert Woodlock, recorded on May 21, 2009, in the Los Angeles County Recorder's Office as Instrument No. 20090753104 is subordinate to the 2009 BOA DOT 3. All costs and expenses incurred in this action shall be borne by each respective Party. (MD JS-6, Case Terminated). (lom) |
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the California Central District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.