Candor

Candor v. United States

Good Law
1 F. Supp. 3d 1076·2014 WL 654595·113 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 985·2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21470
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaFebruary 18, 2014Case No. 13-CV-1044-LAB-WMCCalifornia3,462 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Burns, J.

ORDER GRANTING GOVERNMENT’S MOTION TO DISMISS

Monique Candor, a lawyer, was owed a lot of money by a client, and she expected to be paid when the client sold her home. Instead, the client settled a tax debt with the IRS. Candor sued, claiming that her lien on the home was superior to the IRS’s liens, and that she was due some of the *1078 sale proceeds. Now before the Court is the Government’s motion to dismiss because it is immune.

I. Legal Standard

“The United States, as sovereign, is immune from suit save as it consents to be sued, and the terms of its consent to be sued in any court define that court’s jurisdiction to entertain the suit.” United States v. Sherwood, 312 U.S. 584, 586 , 61 S.Ct. 767 , 85 L.Ed. 1058 (1941). Thus, the Government’s motion challenges the Court’s jurisdiction, and is brought under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(1). See Balser v. Dep’t of Justice, 327 F.3d 903, 908 (9th Cir.2003); Gilbert v. Da Grossa, 756 F.2d 1455 , 1458 (9th Cir.1985). This case can go forward only if the Government has waived immunity, and the burden falls on Candor to demonstrate an “unequivocal waiver.” United States v. Park Place Assocs., 563 F.3d 907, 924 (9th Cir.2009).

In…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.