- 15 -
(1952); American Equitable Assur. Co. of New York v. Helvering,
68 F.2d 46 (2d Cir. 1933), affg. 27 B.T.A. 247 (1932); Eversole
v. Commissioner, 46 T.C. 56 (1966).
In sum, this Court still has jurisdiction over this case,
and the period of limitations on making an assessment has not
run. We turn next to the proper disposition of the case.
Res judicata
For purposes of our discussion here, the term "res judicata"
encompasses total res judicata or claim preclusion and partial
res judicata or issue preclusion. See Hemmings v. Commissioner,
104 T.C. 221, 231 (1995), and cases cited therein. "[C]laim
preclusion prevents a party from asserting a claim that has been,
or should have been, the subject of prior litigation." Id. at
231. Issue preclusion is "When an issue of fact or law is
actually litigated and determined by a valid and final judgment,
and the determination is essential to the judgment, the
determination is conclusive in a subsequent action * * *." Id.
at 235 (quoting 1 Restatement, Judgments 2d, sec. 27 (1982)). We
need not differentiate between the two concepts here since all of
the issues were before the bankruptcy court.7
7 The meaning and scope of the doctrine of res judicata
has been described by the Supreme Court as follows:
The general rule of res judicata applies to repetitious
suits involving the same cause of action. It rests upon
considerations of economy of judicial time and public policy
favoring the establishment of certainty in legal relations.
(continued...)
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011