Oxford Capital Corp. v. United States

I agree that the magistrate judge erred in failing to apply the proper burden-shifting analysis and that the case should be remanded so that Oxford may have the opportunity to demonstrate that the levy was wrongful. I write, separately because this appeal presents an issue that courts have had few opportunities to address, viz., the evidentiary criterion necessary to sustain the IRS’s initial imposition of a levy upon property. It is indisputable that a levy is a seizure of property. See 26 U.S.C. § 6831(b) (“the term ‘levy’ as used in this title includes the power of distraint and seizure by…