Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 125 F.3d 979 - Fishburn v. Brown

Fishburn v. Brown’s Empirical Analysis

125 F.3d 979 · 1997

Citation profile

51
cited by 51 later decisions
March 2013
most recently cited

14 federal appellate · 6 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 51 later decisions — most recently March 2013 · most notably Textile Productions, Inc. v. Mead Corp. (1998), Joseph Shwarz Beth Shwarz American Boiler Works Inc v. United States of America (2000)

14 federal appellate · 6 district ·

390199720002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Relies on Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics · Bell v. Hood · United States v. Mitchell · United States v. King · Carlson v. Green

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 51 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[t]hese carefully crafted legislative remedies confirm that, in the politically sensitive realm of taxation, Congress's refusal to permit unrestricted damage actions by taxpayers has not been inadvertent.”
    7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “If, in connection with any collection of Federal tax with respect to a taxpayer, any officer or employee of the Internal Revenue Service recklessly or intentionally, or by reason of negligence disregards any provision of this title, or any regulation promulgated under this title, such taxpayer may bring a civil action for damages against the United States in a district court of the United States.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Since Congress has created statutory provisions that enabled [the plaintiff] to challenge the [government's] actions, she does not have an actionable Bivens claim for a violation of due process”
    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.