United States District Court, D. New Hampshire
Accord, pro se, Philip L. Bednar, Esq., Carel M. Eskel, pro
se, Joseph R. Eskel, pro se, William S. Gannon, Esq.
A. DiClerico, Jr. United States District Judge.
United States filed a complaint against Joseph and Carol
Eskel, Bon Accord, and the Town of Danville to reduce to
judgment unpaid federal tax liabilities owed by the Eskels
and to enforce federal tax liens against property that is
held by the Town of Danville. The Eskels, proceeding pro se,
filed a “Notice of Motion to Show Cause.” The
United States has filed its response.
document attached to the Eskels' motion, which is titled
“Verified Show Cause Denial of Jurisdiction, ”
the Eskels challenged the subject matter jurisdiction of this
court to decide the claims brought against them and the
court's personal jurisdiction over them. The United
States demonstrates in its response that both subject matter
jurisdiction and personal jurisdiction exist in this case.
The Eskels did not file a reply to the United States's
complaint, the United States alleges that the Eskels reside
in Rockingham County, New Hampshire. The United States also
alleges that a delegate of the Secretary of the Treasury has
made assessments against Joseph Eskel for income taxes,
penalties, and interest, along with civil penalties and
interest, for more than $10, 000, 000.00 that accrued for tax
periods from 2004 through 2007. The specific dates and
amounts are provided in the complaint.
the United States alleges that Joseph Eskel previously paid
income taxes and earned income from his business for the tax
years 2004 through 2007. Eskel purchased illegal tax
promotion tools that represent that taxpayers can remove
themselves from the federal tax system. He also participated
in a frivolous tax refund scheme, failed to cooperate with
the Internal Revenue Service's examination of his federal
tax liability, and filed other frivolous paperwork. He has
refused to pay his tax liabilities to the United States.
respect to Carol Eskel, the United States alleges that a
delegate of the Secretary of the Treasury made assessments
against her for civil penalties and interest for the tax
years of 2003 through 2007. She also has refused to pay her
liabilities, which totaled $35, 667.48 as of March of 2019.
Eskels and Bon Accord filed an answer to the complaint. The
Eskels each identify as “Priority Creditor, a Lawful
Person, Land and Soil Jurisdiction” in Danville,
“New-Hampshire State.” Doc. no. 10, at *1. In
response to the claims against them, the Eskels state:
“You have made a mistake, so we claim
‘exemption' under your ‘2012 version' of
Title 50, section 7, Subsection c and e. Foreign Sovereign
Immunities Act:” and list twenty items. Id.,
at *3-*4. They also assert, among other things, that they are
not United States citizens and instead are “living
Souls and not a dead entity written in all upper-case letters
on a piece of paper or bond paper being claimed as a vessel
owned by another living or dead entity.” Id.
Subject Matter Jurisdiction
support of their motion, the Eskels provide a variety of
unsupported theories about the source and existence of the
jurisdiction of courts. Despite those theories, the Eskels
provide no legal basis to challenge subject matter
United States explains that under 26 U.S.C. § 7402(a)
this court has jurisdiction to issue orders and render
judgments as may be necessary to enforce the internal revenue
laws. 26 U.S.C. § 7403 provides that the United States
Attorney General or his delegate may have a civil action
filed in a district court of the United States to enforce the
lien of the United States for payment of tax liabilities. In
addition, 28 U.S.C. § 1331 provides that subject matter
jurisdiction exists in federal district courts over all civil
actions arising under the laws of the United States. 28
U.S.C. § 1340 provides subject matter jurisdiction in
federal district courts for civil actions “arising
under any Act of Congress providing for internal
revenue.” And, if any more were needed, 28 U.S.C.
§ 1344 provides that federal district courts have
jurisdiction over civil actions brought by the United States.
the court is satisfied that it has subject matter