Richard Phillips and Marilyn Phillipss v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 federal appellate ·

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

1. “It is argued, a criminal investigation imposes a mandatory obligation to end the partnership treatment. The argument is ingenious but unconvincing. Read as a whole, the regulation [ 26 C.F.R. § 301.6231 (c)-5T] vests discretion in the Commissioner to notify a partner that he or she is under criminal investigation. Until such notice is given, partnership items remain partnership items.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Mekulsia v. Commissioner · John M. Mekulsia v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

2. “[t]he facts were stipulated by the parties in skeletal form sufficient to provide, without much flesh, what was necessary to raise the single issue relied on by Phillips.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. River City Ranches 1 Ltd. v. Comm'r · River City Ranches v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

3. “(1) This section applies in the case of— (B) criminal investigations ... (2) Items may be treated as nonpartnership items. — To the extent that the Secretary determines and provides by regulations that to treat items as partnership items will interfere with the effective and efficient enforcement of this title in any case described in paragraph (1), such items shall be treated as nonpartnership items for purposes of this subchapter. (3) Special rules.' — The Secretary may prescribe by regulation such special rules as the Secretary determines to be necessary to achieve the purposes of this subchapter in any case described in paragraph (1). Treasury Regulation § 301.6231(c)-5 reads: The treatment of items as partnership items with respect to a partner under criminal investigation for the violation of the internal revenue laws relating to income tax will interfere with the effective and efficient enforcement of the internal revenue laws. Accordingly, partnership items of such a partner arising in any partnership taxable year ending on or before the last day of the latest taxable year of the partner to which the criminal investigation relates shall be treated as nonpartnership items as of the date of which the partner is notified that he or she is the subject of criminal investigation and receives written notification from the Service that his or her partnership items shall be treated as nonpartnership items. The partnership items of a partner who is notified that he or she is th”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Martinez v. United States (In Re Martinez)