## Facts

- Federal tax liens against a delinquent taxpayer accrued in 1985.
- The IRS filed notices of federal tax lien in 1988 and 1990.
- Jeanette Mayer-Dupree claimed she purchased the taxpayer’s vehicle in 1986 and received the certificate of title.
- Mayer-Dupree did not register the certificate of title with the state before the IRS acted.
- In 1991, the IRS seized the vehicle to satisfy the tax liens.
- After the seizure, Mayer-Dupree registered the title.
- Mayer-Dupree filed a wrongful levy action under 26 U.S.C. § 7426, asserting the vehicle belonged to her when the IRS seized it.
- The government moved for summary judgment, and the district court dismissed the action.
- Mayer-Dupree appealed to the Tenth Circuit.

## Issues

1. Whether Mayer-Dupree qualified as a “purchaser” under 26 U.S.C. § 6323(h)(6) so that, under § 6323(a), the federal tax liens were not valid against her interest in the vehicle.
2. Whether, under Colorado’s motor-vehicle title statute (Colo. Rev. Stat. § 42-6-109 (1984)), Mayer-Dupree’s failure to register the certificate of title meant her claimed interest was not valid against subsequent purchasers without actual notice.

## Decision

- The Tenth Circuit affirmed the district court’s summary judgment for the IRS.
- The court held that Colorado law required registration of the certificate of title for the buyer’s interest to be valid against a later purchaser without notice.
- Because Mayer-Dupree did not register her title until after the seizure, her interest was not “valid under local law against subsequent purchasers without actual notice” and she therefore was not a “purchaser” under § 6323(h)(6).
- Without purchaser status, § 6323(a) did not protect her from the IRS’s filed tax liens, so her § 7426 wrongful levy claim failed as a matter of law.

## Legal Principles

- Appellate review of summary judgment is de novo, applying the same standard as the district court.
- In determining whether a claimant is a “purchaser” under 26 U.S.C. § 6323(h)(6), courts look to state law to decide whether the claimant’s interest is valid against subsequent purchasers without actual notice.
- Under 26 U.S.C. § 6323(a), a federal tax lien is not valid against a “purchaser” until notice of lien is filed.
- Under Colorado’s certificate-of-title statute for motor vehicles, a buyer who receives a certificate of title but does not register it lacks an ownership interest that is effective against a later good-faith purchaser without notice.

## Conclusion

Because Mayer-Dupree did not register the vehicle’s certificate of title before the IRS seized the car, Colorado law did not treat her claimed interest as valid against a later purchaser without notice; as a result, she was not a “purchaser” under 26 U.S.C. § 6323(h)(6), § 6323(a) provided no protection from the IRS’s filed tax liens, and the Tenth Circuit affirmed summary judgment for the government on her § 7426 wrongful levy claim.


Mayer-Dupree v. Internal Revenue Service, 1993 U.S. App. LEXIS 24639 (1993)