Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 113 FSUPP2D 790 - Host Marriott Corp. v. United States

Host Marriott Corp. v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

2000

Citation profile

10
cited by 10 later decisions
June 2009
most recently cited

1 federal appellate ·

Relationships

Applies 26 U.S.C. § 172 · 26 U.S.C. § 6601

Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio Corporation · Blum v. Stenson · Connecticut National Bank v. Germain · Indopco, Inc. v. Commissioner

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[Tjhose provisions do not establish petitioners’ liability to pay the amounts at issue. Petitioners’ liability to pay those amounts did not arise until petitioners contracted for and received the services. Petitioners’ choice of the means of compliance, and not the regulatory provisions, determined the nature and amount of their costs.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Any amount (not described in subpara-graph (A)) allowable as a deduction under this chapter with respect to a liability which arises under a Federal or State law or out of any tort of the taxpayer if— (I) in the case of a liability arising out of a Federal or State law, the act (or failure to act) giving rise to such liability occurs at least 3 years before the beginning of the taxable year, or (ii) in the case of a liability arising out of a tort, such liability arises out of a series of actions (or failures to act) over an extended period of time a substantial portion of which occurs at least 3 years before the beginning of the taxable year. A liability shall not be taken into account under subparagraph (B) unless the taxpayer used an accrual method of accounting throughout the period or periods during which the acts or failures to act giving rise to such liability occurred.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “The statutory language clearly poses two restrictions upon application of the deduction in this case. First, the claimed deduction must be a liability that arises out of Federal or state law. Both of Plaintiffs losses meet this requirement. The liability for federal income tax deficiency interest arises out of 26 U.S.C. § 6601 (a) under a rate established by § 6621. The liability for workers’ compensation payments arises out of various state laws. Second, the claims must arise out of acts or failures to act more than three years earlier. In the case of the workers’ compensation claims, the liability arose from injuries more than three years before the 1991 tax return. The federal income tax deficiency interest stems from the acts of filing tax returns in 1977, 1978, and 1979. [Host Marriott Corp. v. United States, supra at 793; fn. ref. omitted.]”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.