In Re Varish H. Antablian Janet Antablian, Debtors, Varish H. Antablian Janet Antablian v. State Board of Equalization, for the State of California

30 F.3d 139 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. In re Varish H. ANTABLIAN; Janet Antablian, Debtors, Varish H. ANTABLIAN; Janet Antablian, Appellants, v. STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION, for the State of California, Appellee. No. 93-55124. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted June 9, 1994. Decided July 1, 1994. Before: FARRIS, O'SCANNLAIN and TROTT, Circuit Judges. 1 The Antablians appeal the district court's ruling that the California State Board of Equalization's (the "Board") issuance of a tax determination does not bar the Board's issuance of a second tax determination covering the same period of time. We apply a de novo standard for reviewing the question of the availability of collateral estoppel. Clark v. Bear Stearns & Co., 966 F.2d 1318, 1320 (9th Cir.1992). A district court's interpretation of state law is reviewed under the same independent de novo standard as are questions of federal law. 1 Salve Regina College v.…