Joyce v. Gentsch’s Empirical Analysis
141 F.2d 891 · 1944
Citation profile
32 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 75 later decisions — most recently April 2003 · most notably Ross v. Commissioner (1948), Sanders v. Commissioner (1955)
32 federal appellate · 1 district ·
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 Bull v. United States · Botany Worsted Mills v. United States · Stone v. White · Stearns Co of Boston Mass v. United States · Alamo Nat. Bank v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
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 75 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““§ C03. Closing Agreements. “(a) Authorization. The Commissioner (or any officer or employee of the Bureau of Internal Revenue, including the field service, authorized in writing by the Commissioner) is authorized to enter into an agreement in writing with any person relating to the liability of such person (or of the person or estate for whom he acts) in respect of any internal-revenue tax for any taxable period ending prior to the date of the agreement. “(b) Finality of Agreements. If such agreement is approved by the Secretary or the Undersecretary, within such time as may be stated in such agreement, or later agreed to, such agreement shall be final and conclusive, and, except upon a showing of fraud or malfeasance, or misrepresentation of a material fact— “(1) the case shall not be reopened as to the matters agreed upon or the agreement modified, by any officer, employee, or agent of the United States, and “(2) in any suit, action, or proceeding, such agreement, or any determination, assessment, collection, payment, abatement, refund, or credit made in accordance therewith, shall not be annulled, modified, set aside, or disregarded.””
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““ ‘This Waiver of Restrictions is subject to acceptance by the Deputy Commissioner on the basis of the adjusted liability as hereinabove proposed and if not thus accepted, will have no force or effect. “ ‘If this proposal is accepted the taxpayer agrees (1) to make payment of the above deficiency, together with interest as provided by law, promptly upon receipt of notice and demand from the collector of internal revenue; (2) not to file or prosecute any claim for refund of income taxes for the year 1934 except claims in connection with stock of the Glidden Company received as a bonus and reported as compensation, and (3) upon request of the Commissioner will execute at any time a final closing agreement as to the tax liability, on the foregoing basis, for the said year 1934 under the provisions of section 606 of the Revenue Act of 1928.’ ””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““ ‘The execution and filing of this waiver at the address shown in the accompanying letter will expedite the adjustment of your income tax liability as indicated above. It is not, however, a final closing agreement under Section 606 of the Revenue Act of 1928 and does not, therefore, preclude the assertion of a further deficiency in the manner provided by law should it subsequently be determined that additional tax is due, nor does it extend the statutory period of limitation for refund, assessment, or collection of the tax. ’ ””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Hamil v. Fahs
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.