W. Russell Van Camp; Teresa Van Camp v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision**
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
The Honorable William T. Hart, Senior United States District Judge***
(continued...)
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
W. RUSSELL VAN CAMP; TERESA
VAN CAMP,
Petitioners,
v.
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL
REVENUE,
Respondent.
No. 09-70622
Tax Ct. No. 3639-07L
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from a Decision of the
United States Tax Court
Diane Kroupa, Tax Court Judge, Presiding
Submitted July 16, 2010**
Seattle, Washington
Before: RYMER and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges, and HART, Senior District
Judge.***
FILED
JUL 20 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 3 --

(...continued)
for the Northern District of Illinois, sitting by designation.
-2-
W. Russell and Teresa Van Camp (collectively, taxpayers) appeal from a
decision by the United States Tax Court determining that the Appeals Office did
not abuse its discretion in allowing a collection action to proceed. We affirm.
Much of this appeal turns on Russell Van Camp’s attempt to relitigate his
tax liability for his 1993 tax year. Liability for that tax year is not, however, still
on the table. In 2000, Van Camp stipulated to his liability for his 1993 tax year,
and the Tax Court entered a decision pursuant to that stipulation that a deficiency
was due. That decision is res judicata. Comm’r v. Sunnen, 333 U.S. 591, 598
(1948).
Live testimony was not necessary to resolve disputed facts or to contradict
the Appeals Office’s decision, as taxpayers maintain. The validity of the 1993 tax
liability (the asserted reason for the dispute) was not in issue. In addition,
taxpayers stipulated to the authenticity of the decision letter. Further, review is
limited to the administrative record. See Keller v. Comm’r, 568 F.3d 710, 718 (9th
Cir. 2009). Finally, to the extent taxpayers now claim they could have presented
evidence about the timely assessment of taxes, the issue is waived for failure to
raise it in the Collection Due Process or Tax Court proceedings.

-- 2 of 3 --

-3-
AFFIRMED.

-- 3 of 3 --