- 18 -
estate is not entitled to deduct the full amount that was being
claimed by Exxon at Decedent’s death.” Id. at 521. Rather, the
estate argues that this language was not necessary to the Court
of Appeals’s decision, and, therefore, the court’s instructions
on valuing the claim constitute dicta.
Under the law of the case doctrine, the decision of a legal
issue by an appellate court establishes the law of the case and
must be followed in all subsequent proceedings in the same case
at both the trial and appellate levels. Christianson v. Colt
Indus. Op. Corp., 486 U.S. 800, 816 (1988); Reid v. Rolling Fork
Pub. Util. Dist., 979 F.2d 1084, 1086 (5th Cir. 1992); Pollei v.
Commissioner, 94 T.C. 595, 601 (1990). The issues the lower
court is precluded from considering include those that were
decided by the appellate court expressly or by necessary
implication. Browning v. Navarro, 887 F.2d 553, 556 (5th Cir.
1989); Pollei v. Commissioner, supra. The trial court on remand
must follow the appellate court’s mandate, and it is guided and
confined by that court’s decree and direction. Pollei v.
Commissioner, supra at 602.
The parties agree that Exxon was seeking $2,482,719 from
decedent at the time of her death. However, contrary to the
estate’s argument, the Court of Appeals did not find that Exxon’s
claim was enforceable to the extent of this amount. Rather, the
Court of Appeals found that the amount of the estate’s section
Page: Previous 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011