United States v. Toth
| United States |
| Monica Toth |
| 1:2015cv13367 |
| September 16, 2015 |
| U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts |
| Boston Office |
| Middlesex |
| Allison D. Burroughs |
| Taxes (US Plaintiff or Defendant) |
| 31 U.S.C. ยง 3545 |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
175
Judge Allison D. Burroughs: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER entered. The Government's motion for summary judgment, [ECF No. 164 ], is GRANTED. Defendant is ordered to pay $3,138,097.48, consisting of $2,173,703.00 for her willful failure to timely file an FBAR for the 2007 calendar year, $826,469.56 in late fees, and $137,925.92 in interest. See [ECF No. 166 -2 at 2]. SO ORDERED. (McDonagh, Christina)
|
|
Filing
158
Judge Allison D. Burroughs: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER entered. Defendant's motion to vacate sanctions, [ECF No. 130 ], is DENIED. SO ORDERED. (McDonagh, Christina)
|
|
Filing
110
Judge Allison D. Burroughs: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER entered. For the reasons explained above, the Governments amended motion for sanctions is GRANTED and it is hereby ORDERED that the following facts are taken as established for purposes of this liti gation:1. Defendant had legal control over, and the legal authority to direct the disposition of the funds in, the Account (and any sub-accounts), by investing the funds, withdrawing the funds, and/or transferring the funds to third-parties, bet ween the date the Account was opened and at least December 31, 2008. 2. Should the United States establish that Defendant is liable for the penalty alleged in the complaint, for the purposes of calculating the amount of such penalty, the Ac count (and any sub-accounts) contained $4,347,407 as of the penalty-calculation date. 3. Defendant had a legal obligation to timely file an FBAR regarding the Account in each calendar year that the Account was open, including with regard to calendar year 2007. 4. Defendant willfully failed to file an FBAR regarding the Account with respect to calendar year 2007. The Government may file an itemized statement of costs and attorneys fees documenting the costs and fees that it incurred in preparing the amended motion for sanctions within 30 days of this order, should it wish to recover fees and costs. SO ORDERED.(McDonagh, Christina)
|
|
Filing
59
Judge Allison D. Burroughs: ORDER entered denying 49 Defendant's Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction and for Failure to State a Claim. A copy of this Order has been mailed to the Defendant. (Montes, Mariliz)
|
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 Massachusetts 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
| Search for this case: United States v. Toth | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: United States | |
| Represented By: | Andrew A. DeMello |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant: Monica Toth | |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
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.
