Daugette v. Patterson’s Empirical Analysis
250 F.2d 753 · 1957
Citation profile
31 federal appellate · 2 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 46 later decisions — most recently April 2003 · most notably United States v. Silkwood (1989), Flynn v. United States (1986)
31 federal appellate · 2 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 Botany Worsted Mills v. United States · Stearns Co of Boston Mass v. United States · Mellon 206 1920 v. New Jersey Shipbuilding & Dredging Company · Joyce v. Gentsch · Guggenheim v. United States
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 46 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“It is not, however, a final closing agreement under Section 3760 of the Internal Revenue Code, nor does it extend the statutory period of limitation for refund, assessment, or collection of the tax;”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““The holding in this case is, I think, contrary to the legislative policy that there can be no compromise of a tax claim by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue unless assented to by the Secretary of the Treasury. Sections 3760 and 3761, Internal Revenue Code of 1939, 26 U.S.C.A. §§ 3760 , 3761; Sections 7121 and 7122 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, 26 U.S.C.A. §§ 7121 , 7122; Botany Mills v. United States, 278 U.S. 282 , 289, 49 S.Ct. 129 , 73 L.Ed. 379 . The Commissioner or his representative should not be permitted by indirection to usurp the functions which Congress has vested in the Secretary or his delegate. To allow that to be accomplished, first by tacit compliance of the parties with an agreement of compromise not approved by the Secretary and then by the device or theory that the taxpayer is estopped to deny the compromise or to file or prosecute a claim for refund contrary to his promise which had not been accepted by the Secretary, and hence was not legally binding, seems to me wholly impermissible.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““ * * * And, without determining whether such an agreement, though not binding in itself, may when executed become, under somé circumstances, binding on the parties by estoppel, it suffices to say that here the findings disclose no adequate ground for any claim of estop-pel by the United States.””
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.