Taxing Matters;

this is a tangent off the issue at hand and doesn't address any issues concerning the issue at hand but I've never seen the res judicata explained so thoroughly such that it makes a similar situation in criminal law seem so wrong.

you have stated, basically, that res judicata applies when an action has been adjudicated in a state court and a party attempts to take the matter to a federal court (and I presume the reverse applies as well). If true, how can a person be tried in both state and federal court for the same criminal acts. Since it has been ruled to not be a double jeopardy issue when doing so, how can the much more serious and protected issue of being criminally charged be allowed to proceed in both state and federal courts when the similar civil action is barred?