7
severed petitioner from the case at docket No. 27416-89 for
purposes of considering respondent’s motion.
In her motion, petitioner argues that rulings of the
Bankruptcy Court are binding on the Tax Court. Petitioner
further contends that by order of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for
the Eastern District of California, she was released from all
dischargeable debts.
Respondent does not dispute that an order of the Bankruptcy
Court is binding. Respondent argues, however, that petitioner
has not alleged that the Bankruptcy Court made a determination
with respect to her tax liability for the years in issue.
Respondent argues that the deficiencies in issue are not
dischargeable, citing 11 U.S.C. sections 523 and 507(a)(8)
(1994). Moreover, respondent argues that this Court is without
jurisdiction to determine whether petitioner's tax liability was
discharged. Finally, respondent argues that the proceedings
should not be stayed as to petitioner because she is a separate
taxpayer from Mr. Zavitz.
Generally, the filing of a petition in bankruptcy acts as an
automatic stay against, inter alia, the continuation of a
proceeding before the Tax Court concerning the debtor. 11 U.S.C.
sec. 362(a)(8). An automatic stay continues until the case is
closed, the case is dismissed, or a discharge is granted,
whichever is earliest. 11 U.S.C. sec. 362(c)(2)(1994). "After
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011