Assessing the Identity of a Claim: The Preclusive Effect of a Prior Challenge to an Administrative Agency's Statutory Interpretation on Subsequent Tax Litigation in Pittston Co. v. United States
Loading...
Authors
Brant, Jesse O.
Issue Date
2001
Volume
34
Issue
4
Type
Journal Article
Language
Keywords
Alternative Title
Abstract
INTRODUCTION|The doctrine of res judicata bars a party from the relitigation of a claim that was raised or could have been raised in a prior action. However, this doctrine is applicable to bar a claim only when three conditions have been met. These conditions include: (1) a prior final judgment on the merits, rendered in accordance with the rules of due process by a court of proper jurisdiction; (2) identical parties; and (3) the claims in the later action are based upon the same cause of action involved in the prior proceeding. In order to determine whether causes of action are identical, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit employs the transactional approach set forth in the Restatement (Second) of Judgments. This paradigm embodies a pragmatic approach to assessing the dimensions of a claim, referring to a number of factors to be considered. These factors include such considerations as whether the claims would form a convenient trial unit, whether the claims are related in time, space, and origin, and the expectations of the parties. In the context of tax litigation, the United States Supreme Court has established, in Commissioner v. Sunnen, that the concepts of claim preclusion apply. In Sunnen, the Supreme Court stated that each year gave rise to a new tax liability, and, thus a separate cause of action. As such, a determination for one tax year will not have a preclusive effect on an action involving a later tax year...
Description
Citation
34 Creighton L. Rev. 1027 (2000-2001)
Publisher
Creighton University School of Law