United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 17-1301

___________________________

United States of America

lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee

v.

Lester R. Ramer; Mary Ramer

lllllllllllllllllllll Defendants - Appellants

Deer Creek Financial Services, LLC; Sycamore Leasing; Echo Acres; Concrete

Concepts; HIS Management; Benton County Tax Collector; State of Arkansas;

Arkansas Commissioner of State Lands

lllllllllllllllllllll Defendants

____________

Appeal from United States District Court 

for the Western District of Arkansas - Fayetteville

____________

 Submitted: October 26, 2017

 Filed: November 3, 2017

[Unpublished]

____________

Before COLLOTON, BOWMAN, and KELLY, Circuit Judges.

____________

PER CURIAM.
Lester and Mary Ramer appeal following entry of default judgment by the

district court in the government’s civil action to reduce federal income tax

1

assessments to judgment and enforce federal tax liens against real property. The

government has moved for sanctions on appeal.

Having carefully reviewed the record, and considered the parties’ submissions

on appeal, we find that the Ramers’ appellate arguments are frivolous. First, the

district court did not abuse its discretion in granting default, as the Ramers

affirmatively refused to file an answer or otherwise participate in the proceedings

once their motion to dismiss was denied. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(a)(4)(A) (answer is

due 14 days after court denies motion to dismiss); 55(a) (default judgment is

warranted when the defendant “has failed to plead or otherwise defend”); Ackra

Direct Mktg. Corp. v. Fingerhut Corp., 86 F.3d 852, 857 (8th Cir. 1996) (default

judgment is appropriate if the conduct is willful, contumacious, or intentional). Next,

the government had standing to bring this debt-collection action under specific

statutory authority. See 26 U.S.C. § 7403(a), (c) (government may bring civil action

to enforce tax liens; where tax debt is established, court may order sale of property

and distribution of proceeds). Further, the district court did not abuse its discretion

in denying the Ramers’ recusal motion. See United States v. Oaks, 606 F.3d 530, 537

(8th Cir. 2010) (recusal decision is reviewed for abuse of discretion; judge is

presumed impartial, and party seeking disqualification bears substantial burden of

proving that judge’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned; adverse rulings do

not establish bias). We reject the Ramers’ remaining arguments for the reasons

articulated by the district court.

This court may award “just damages” and single or double costs if it determines

that an appeal is frivolous. 28 U.S.C. § 1912; Fed. R. App. P. 38. In this case,

The Honorable Timothy L. Brooks, United States District Judge for the

1

Western District of Arkansas.

-2-
sanctions are appropriate. See United States v. Gerads, 999 F.2d 1255, 1256–57 (8th

Cir. 1993) (per curiam) (rejecting frivolous tax-protester arguments; granting

government’s motion for sanctions for frivolous appeal).

The judgment is affirmed, see 8th Cir. R. 47B, and this court grants the

government’s motion for sanctions in the amount of $8,000. 

______________________________

-3-