Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 255 F.2d 84 - Hector v. United States

Hector v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

255 F.2d 84 · 1958

Citation profile

18
cited by 18 later decisions
February 2011
most recently cited

10 federal appellate · 1 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently February 2011

10 federal appellate · 1 district ·

601958196019701980199020002010decided

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. § 276

Relies on Bowers v. New York & Albany Lighterage Co. · Investment & Securities Co. v. United States · United States v. Havner · United States v. Ettelson

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

  1. “(a) Length of period. — Where the assessment of any tax imposed by this title has been made within the period of limitation properly applicable thereto, such tax may be collected by levy or by a proceeding in court, but only if the levy is made or the proceeding begun— (1) within 10 years after the assessment of the tax, or (2) .... If a timely proceeding in court for the collection of a tax is commenced, the period during which such tax may be collected by levy shall be extended and shall not expire until the liability for the tax (or a judgment against the taxpayer arising from such liability) is satisfied or becomes unenforceable.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “2 7 26 U.S.C.A. Sec. 6502(a). In the instant case there is no question that the assessments against Maggie Tookes were timely made under 26 U.S.C.A. Sec. 6501. However, the plaintiff asserts that section 6502(a) barred the government's foreclosure suits in this case because such suits were not brought within six years after the assessment of the tax. To pursue his argument it is necessary that the plaintiff assert that the phrase”
    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.