UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. HIATT et al
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
|Date Filed||#||Document Text|
|June 22, 2017
ORDER - This matter involves an action by the United States of America (the "Government") to collect unpaid income tax liabilities and frivolous return penalties assessed against Defendant Marzella Hiatt, and to enforce federal tax liens on several properties located in Sheridan, Indiana which secure those debts. On September 4, 2014, the Court granted summary judgment and entered final judgment in favor of the Government on all of the Government's claims. [Filing No. 74 ; Filing No. 75 .] The Court now addresses two motions filed by Ms. Hiatt: (1) a Motion to Void Judgment and Dismiss, [Filing No. 129 ]; and (2) a Motion to Cease and Desist - Dismiss, [Filing No. 132 ]. For the reasons stated in this Order, the Court DENIES Ms. Hiatt's Motion to Void Judgment and Dismiss, [Filing No. 129 ], and DENIES her Motion to Cease and Desist - Dismiss, [Filing No. 132 ]. The Court cautions Ms. Hiatt that, as long as she remains represented by counsel in this matter, any future filings must be made through counsel. (See Order). Copy to Plaintiff via US Mail. Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 6/22/2017. (APD)
|September 4, 2014
ORDER granting 42 Government's Motion for Summary Judgment. Final Judgment will issue accordingly. ***SEE ORDER***. Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 9/4/2014. (JKS)
|August 15, 2014
ORDER : Presently pending before the Court is the United States of America's (the "Government's") Motion for Summary Judg ment. Mr. Hiatt failed to respond to the Government's Motion for Summary Judgment and the time for doing so has passed. Ms. Hiatt responded, but did not address the merits of the Government's motion; she instead requests further discovery pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(d). Ms. Hiatt responded, but did not address the merits of the Government's motion; she instead requests further discovery pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(d). [Filing No. 67.] For the reasons explained below, Ms. Hiatt is not entitled to discovery under Rule 56(d). The Court will, however, provide Ms. Hiatt an opportunity to respond to the merits of the Government's motion. the Court denies Ms. Hiatt 's Rule 56(d) request to stay the summary judgment motion and pursue further discovery. The Court, however, will allow Ms. Hiatt to respond to the merits of the Government's Motion for Summary Judgment. In doing so, Ms. Hiatt may not attach any documents that have not previously been provided by the Government, as she failed to s ubmit any Fed. R. Civ. P. 26 initial disclosures or preliminary witness and exhibit lists. [Filing No. 43 at 9.] Ms. Hiatt has until August 22, 2014, to file a res ponse brief. The Government may file a reply brief by September 5, 2014 (see Order for additional information). Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 8/15/2014.(SWM)
Access additional case information on PACER
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 Indiana Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
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.
Why Is My Information Online?