Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 234 F.2d 237 - Voss v. Wiseman

Voss v. Wiseman’s Empirical Analysis

234 F.2d 237 · 1956

Citation profile

17
cited by 17 later decisions
1
states following
December 1996
most recently cited

7 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently December 1996

7 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

10019561960197019801990decided

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

Applies 26 U.S.C. § 311

Relies on Phillips v. Commissioner · Phillips v. Commissioner · Royal Indemnity Co. v. United States · Hulburd v. Commissioner · United States v. United Drill & Tool Corp.

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

  1. “[section 311] does not impose any new obligations on the transferee of the taxpayer’s property and may be used only to enforce a liability already existing in law or in equity. * * * The statute does not require the transferee to respond in interest except that which is due from the transferor. * * * [Id. at 239-240.]”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “the right of the Commissioner to interest must be predicated upon the theory of damages for delay in making payment. * * * If the transferee * * * [after receiving notice] retained possession or refused to pay, the Commissioner was damaged and could recover interest to the same extent as might be awarded by a court of law or equity. [Id. at 240; citations omitted.]”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[a]ssuming that the Tax Court had jurisdiction to determine the amount of interest due, we hold that ordinarily, if claim had been made, the plaintiffs would be responsible for interest on the value of the assets received from April 6, 1948, the date of the deficiency assessment and notice thereof, to the date of payment.”
    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.