- 21 -
relevant time period. Cf. Klein v. Commissioner, 880 F.2d 260,
263-264 (10th Cir. 1989) (this Court did not err in concluding
that new expert testimony regarding the taxpayer's mental
incompetency did not change the controlling facts for purposes of
collateral estoppel when similar evidence had been presented and
considered in the prior proceeding), affg. T.C. Memo. 1984-392.
In conclusion, we find that all five conditions of the Peck
requirements have been satisfied with respect to the Aldergrove
issue, and, therefore, petitioners are precluded from
relitigating that issue. Thus, we find that, on December 26,
1991, petitioner controlled Aldergrove partnership matters and
benefited from and controlled the funds in the Aldergrove
account.
d. Petitioners Attempt To Cast Doubt on the
Sufficiency of the Aldergrove Issue
We shall now turn to an examination of the evidence in this
case in light of the Aldergrove issue established in Monahan I.
There is no dispute that the 1991 interest payments are interest
payments that were credited to the Aldergrove account on
December 26, 1991, and December 31, 1991. That fact in
conjunction with our finding that, on December 26, 1991,
petitioner controlled Aldergrove partnership matters and
benefited from and controlled the funds in the Aldergrove account
permits this Court to infer that petitioner had control over and
Page: Previous 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011