Legal Opinion
Arnold v. United States
District Court, D. Oregon
Decided January 23, 1992No. Civ. 90-6296-JOPublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER
ROBERT E. JONES, District Judge.
Plaintiff, Lowell and Rosa Arnold (the “Arnolds”), bring this claim against defendant, the United States of America (the “government”) seeking a refund of federal income tax for tax year 1983. The Arnolds submit, and the government concedes, that the government incorrectly determined the extent of the Arnolds’ tax liability for the tax year 1983 by disallowing a valid employee expense deduction claimed by the Arnolds. However, the government contends that the Arnolds’ claim is barred by res judicata. This is a narrow issue of law which has been…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Commissioner v. SunnenSupreme Court of the United States · 1948
- Federated Department Stores, Inc. v. MoitieSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- United States v. International Building Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1953
- Dolores J. Russell v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1982
- Sam Snyder v. Robert A. Riddell, District Director, Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1958
3Cited by5 opinions
- Hemmings v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1995
- In Re Mr. Movies, Inc.United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Minnesota · 2002
- Hemmings v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1995
- Kroh v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1992
- Kroh v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1992