- 7 -
attaches, extends to the entire subject of the correct tax for
the particular year.” Erickson v. United States, 159 Ct. Cl.
202, 309 F.2d 760, 767 (1962).
An agreed or stipulated judgment is a judgment on the merits
for purposes of res judicata. Baker v. IRS, 74 F.3d 906, 910
(9th Cir. 1996); accord Erickson v. United States, supra at 768;
Krueger v. Commissioner, 48 T.C. 824, 828-829 (1967); see also
United States v. Intl. Bldg. Co., 345 U.S. 502, 503-506 (1953)
(upholding res judicata effect of stipulated Tax Court
decisions).
Respondent issued to petitioners a notice of deficiency for
1995. Petitioners petitioned for redetermination, and the case
was concluded without trial by entry of a stipulated decision on
February 25, 2002. Petitioners, however, argue that res judicata
does not apply because petitioner, Nelson Goodman, “believed that
Petitioner would be entitled to a hearing by the IRS
notwithstanding submissions to the Tax Court”. Petitioners also
allege that they were misled by an agent of respondent into
thinking that the deficiency was open for further consideration;
essentially they are asserting an estoppel against respondent.
Petitioners have provided no authority for the proposition that
mistake or estoppel is an exception to the application of res
judicata.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011