- 28 -
BEGHE, J., concurring: I write separately to address
concerns expressed by Judge Vasquez and other concerns, and to
attempt to provide explanations of matters left to implication by
the majority opinion.
On the initial question of the Court’s jurisdiction to
address the bankruptcy discharge issue, I would flesh out the
majority opinion’s conclusion that the Tax Court has jurisdiction
to address the issue under its statutory mandate, to observe that
the Bankruptcy Act, 28 U.S.C. section 1334(a) and (b) (2000),
does not deprive the Tax Court of jurisdiction.1 Although sub-
section (a) provides that “the district courts shall have origi-
nal and exclusive jurisdiction of all cases under title 11”, the
case at hand appears to be a situation described in subsection
(b) “arising under title 11, or arising in or related to cases
under title 11” in which the district courts have original but
not exclusive jurisdiction. The corollary proposition is that
the case at hand is one in which other courts, including the Tax
128 U.S.C. sec. 1334(a) and (b) provides as follows:
(a) Except as provided in subsection (b) of this
section, the district courts shall have original and
exclusive jurisdiction of all cases under title 11.
(b) Notwithstanding any Act of Congress that confers
exclusive jurisdiction on a court or courts other than
the district courts, the district courts shall have
original but not exclusive jurisdiction of all civil
proceedings arising under title 11, or arising in or
related to cases under title 11.
Page: Previous 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011