-11-
corporation. Our opinion relied on earlier opinions upholding
collateral estoppel from a corporation to its shareholder. Less
than a month later, we issued our opinion in C.B.C. Super
Markets, Inc. v. Commissioner, 54 T.C. 882, 893-896 (1970), in
which we analyzed some of the same opinions that we had analyzed
in Sparks Nugget. In C.B.C. Super Markets we concluded that, in
general and in that case, collateral estoppel should not run from
a shareholder to the corporation. As noted supra, we have
continued to draw the same distinction. The instant case is
similar to C.B.C. Super Markets and not to Sparks Nugget, for the
reasons stated in those two opinions. Thus, Sparks Nugget,
although good law in its setting, does not support respondent’s
position in the instant case.
Bertoli v. Commissioner, 103 T.C. 501 (1994), dealt with a
petitioner who had participated in previous litigation as a
custodian for his brother’s minor children and as the sole
general partner of a limited partnership. In Bertoli, we held
that the taxpayer was collaterally estopped in his individual
capacity because his own interest in persuading the Court in the
previous trial coincided with his interests as general partner
and as custodian of his brother’s minor children, who were
limited partners in the partnership. Thus, the taxpayer in the
second case was treated as having been a party in the first case.
In the instant case, petitioner did not participate in Anthony’s
criminal tax litigation, nor has respondent alleged that
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011