- 21 -
judgment on the merits “is res judicata as to any subsequent
proceeding involving the same claim and the same tax year.” Id.
Petitioner and respondent litigated petitioner’s 1994 tax
liability in the bankruptcy case, and petitioner now is
attempting to relitigate his 1994 tax liability in the instant
case. Petitioner is thus attempting to litigate the same cause
of action in the instant case as he litigated in the bankruptcy
case. The fact that petitioner raises different theories of
relief in the instant case does not make the cause of action in
the instant case different from the cause of action in his
bankruptcy case. It is well settled that the preclusive effect
of a prior judgment extends not only to claims or defenses
actually presented in the first case, but also to “any other
admissible matter which might have been offered for that
purpose.” Cromwell v. County of Sac, 94 U.S. at 352. Each of
the contentions petitioner asserts in the instant case was
available to him during his bankruptcy proceeding. Accordingly,
the second requirement for res judicata is satisfied.
The third requirement of res judicata is that a court of
competent jurisdiction enter a final judgment on the merits.
Bankruptcy courts have jurisdiction to determine the tax
liabilities of persons proceeding in bankruptcy court. See
United States v. Wilson, 974 F.2d 514, 518 (4th Cir. 1992);
Freytag v. Commissioner, 110 T.C. 35, 40 (1998). Thus, the
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