Thomas G. Wright and Estate of Rosemary K. Wright, Deceased, Thomas G. Wright, Personal Representative - Page 21

                                       - 21 -                                         
          the doctrine of collateral estoppel only forecloses relitgation             
          of an issue previously litigated and decided in a prior suit.               
          Id. at 326 n.5; United States v. Intl. Bldg. Co., 345 U.S. 502,             
          505 (1953); Meier v. Commissioner, supra at 282.  In Megibow v.             
          Commissioner, supra, this Court recently observed:                          
                    From a legal standpoint, income taxes are levied                  
               on an annual basis, such that each year represents a                   
               new liability and a separate cause of action.                          
               Commissioner v. Sunnen, 333 U.S. 591, 598-600 (1948);                  
               Fla. Peach Corp. v. Commissioner, 90 T.C. [678], 682.                  
               Given this principle, collateral estoppel would not                    
               operate to establish entitlement to deductions in one                  
               year based merely on an allowance of similar deductions                
               in a different year or years.  See Barmes v.                           
               Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2001-155 (rejecting attempts                  
               to apply collateral estoppel to depreciation deductions                
               based on a prior litigated tax year), affd. 89 AFTR 2d                 
               2002-2249, 2002-1 USTC par. 50,312 (7th Cir. 2002); see                
               also, Adolph Coors Co. v. Commissioner, 519 F.2d 1280,                 
               1283 (10th Cir. 1975)(rejecting an attempt to apply                    
               collateral estoppel even though the exact issue was                    
               raised in a prior Tax Court proceeding but, because the                
               Commissioner abandoned the issue during the litigation,                
               no judicial determination or findings were made), affg.                
               60 T.C. 368 (1973).                                                    
               In a factual context, for collateral estoppel to apply, the            
          following requirements are necessary:                                       
                    1. The issue in the second suit must be identical                 
                    in all respects with the one decided in the first                 
                    suit.                                                             
                    2. There must be a final judgment rendered by a                   
                    court of competent jurisdiction.                                  
                    3. Collateral estoppel may be invoked against                     
                    parties and their privies to the prior judgment.                  
                    4. The parties must actually have litigated the                   
                    issues and the resolution of these issues must                    
                    have been essential to the prior decision.                        
                    5. The controlling facts and applicable legal                     
                    rules must remain unchanged from those in the                     
                    prior litigation.  [Peck v. Commissioner, 90 T.C.                 





Page:  Previous  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011