Estate of Bessie I. Mueller, Deceased, John S. Mueller, Personal Representative - Page 91

                                               - 91 -                                                  
            jurisdiction over all the counterclaims, and the Government                                
            appealed this holding.  The parties agreed that the counterclaims                          
            could cancel the Government's general claim for damages of                                 
            $68,279.72.  The issue in dispute was whether the counterclaims                            
            could also be asserted against the Government's claim for the                              
            reclamation of its property, so that the whole of the                                      
            counterclaims could have effect.  The Court of Appeals found that                          
            they could not be asserted to that extent, since the Government                            
            had not waived its sovereign immunity to that extent.  In                                  
            holding, in effect, that the property claim did not involve the                            
            same transaction, the Court of Appeals gave a particularly narrow                          
            reading of the single-transaction requirement, especially for a                            
            bankruptcy case.  That issue would almost certainly be decided                             
            differently today,38 so that there would be no question of                                 

                  38Cf. In re Pullman Constr. Indus., Inc., 142 Bankr. 280                             
            (Bankr. N.D. Ill. 1992) (questioning In re Greenstreet, Inc., 209                          
            F.2d 660 (7th Cir. 1954), on the basis of later Seventh Circuit                            
            decisions about the single-transaction issue, making the test for                          
            deciding whether sovereign immunity is waived with respect to a                            
            counterclaim whether the counterclaim is a compulsory                                      
            counterclaim to the claim in question, and holding on that basis                           
            that sovereign immunity had been waived with respect to the                                
            counterclaim), affd. sub nom. United States v. Pullman Constr.                             
            Indus., Inc., 153 Bankr. 539 (N.D. Ill. 1993), appeal dismissed                            
            sub nom. Pullman Constr. Indus., Inc. v. United States, 23 F.3d                            
            1166 (7th Cir. 1994).  Query whether if there has been such a                              
            liberalization of the single-transaction requirement for                                   
            equitable recoupment in bankruptcy, there should not be a similar                          
            liberalization in the tax area, and whether the post-Rothensies                            
            v. Electric Storage Battery Co. cases cited in the discussion of                           
            the single-transaction requirement do not demonstrate precisely                            
                                                                         (continued...)                





Page:  Previous  80  81  82  83  84  85  86  87  88  89  90  91  92  93  94  95  96  97  98  99  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011