United States v. Michel’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

211 federal appellate · 57 district · 8 state decisions

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

1. ““By this statute the United States waived its sovereign immunity from suit. The permission to sue is conditioned on the filing of a claim and the lapse of six months or the dis-allowance of the claim within that period, and is limited to not more than five years after payment of the tax unless the claim has been disallowed and the action is commenced within two years from the disallowance. [Italics supplied.] *•»***# “ * * * By the terms of the statute the period within which the Government consented to be sued commenced at the expiration of such six months and continued uninterruptedly through the five-year period following the date of payment and until ‘two years after the disallowance.’” [Italics supplied.]”

   5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. First Nat. Bank of Chicago v. United States · Harrop v. United States

2. ““There is nothing in the legislative history of the provision to indicate an intention that the two-year period should not commence upon the disallowance of the claim or that it should be extended by the failure of the Commissioner to give the specified notice. “Having regard to the rule of strict construction to be applied to waivers by the United States of its sovereign immunity from suit, the clause reasonably may be read merely as a direction to the Commissioner to send the notice to claimant without making the failure so to do have the effeet of enlarging the period for suing as otherwise definitely prescribed.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Pacific Mills v. Nichols

3. “No suit or proceeding shall be maintained in any court for the recovery of any internal revenue tax alleged to have been erroneously or illegally assessed or collected, or of any penalty claimed to have been collected without authority, or of any sum alleged to have been excessive or in any manner wrongfully collected, until a claim for refund or credit has been duly filed with the Secretary, according to the provi sions of law in that regard, and the regulations of the Secretary established in pursuance thereof.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 92 Fed. Cl. 277 - Edwards v. United States