Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

The Bankruptcy StrategistFeaturesBankruptcyLitigationTax

Stipulation That Resolves Entire Amount Must Reflect Intent of Parties

By Francis J. Lawall and Kenneth A. Listwak
July 01, 2022

It arguably goes without saying that when entering into a stipulation or any settlement in a bankruptcy proceeding that purports to resolve the entire amount and treatment of a claim, the terms of such agreement must fully and clearly reflect the intent of the parties. This is particularly true in connection with nondischargeable priority tax claims, as demonstrated in a recent U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit decision. See, Minor v. United States (In re Minor), No. 21-55360 (9th Cir. Apr. 18, 2022). In Minor, the Ninth Circuit affirmed the lower courts' rulings that a stipulation between the IRS and a bankruptcy trustee, which allowed the IRS's priority tax claim, did not prevent the IRS from collecting nondischargeable tax debt above the agreed amount in that stipulation.

In Minor, the IRS held a priority claim for the debtor's 2009 tax debt, which the parties agreed was nondischargeable. Typically, a taxing authority is able to pursue additional nondischargeable tax debt, even if the IRS included such debt in a proof of claim in the bankruptcy proceeding. However, here, the IRS and the trustee entered into a stipulation, approved by the bankruptcy court, which allowed the IRS's 2009 priority tax claim in the amount of $997,869.07. When the IRS attempted to pursue the debtor for further amounts owed by the debtor from his 2009 taxes, he argued, relying on the doctrines of issue and claim preclusion, that the IRS was foreclosed from collecting any 2009 tax debt above the amount agreed to in the stipulation. After the bankruptcy court granted judgment on the pleadings in favor of the IRS, which the district court affirmed, the debtor appealed to the Ninth Circuit.

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
Why So Many Great Lawyers Stink at Business Development and What Law Firms Are Doing About It Image

Why is it that those who are best skilled at advocating for others are ill-equipped at advocating for their own skills and what to do about it?

Bankruptcy Sales: Finding a Diamond In the Rough Image

There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.

The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year Later Image

The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.

A Lawyer's System for Active Reading Image

Active reading comprises many daily tasks lawyers engage in, including highlighting, annotating, note taking, comparing and searching texts. It demands more than flipping or turning pages.

Protecting Innovation in the Cyber World from Patent Trolls Image

With trillions of dollars to keep watch over, the last thing we need is the distraction of costly litigation brought on by patent assertion entities (PAEs or "patent trolls"), companies that don't make any products but instead seek royalties by asserting their patents against those who do make products.