Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 370 U.S. 1 - Enochs v. Williams Packing & Navigation Co.

Enochs v. Williams Packing & Navigation Co.’s Empirical Analysis

1962

Citation profile

2,571
cited by 2,571 later decisions
32
cited 32 times by the Supreme Court
15
states following
August 2023
most recently cited

836 federal appellate · 370 district · 73 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 2,571 later decisions (32 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2023 · most notably United States v. Janis (1976), Samuels v. J Mackell Fernandez (1971)

836 federal appellate · 370 district · 73 state decisions — followed in 15 states

68501962197019801990200020102020decided

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.

Appellate journey

reviewedJ. L. Enochs, District Director of Internal Revenue v. Williams Packing & Navigation Co., Inc. (from Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals)

Relationships

Applies 26 U.S.C. § 3111 (Federal Insurance Contributions Act) · 26 U.S.C. § 3121 (Federal Insurance Contributions Act) · 26 U.S.C. § 3301 (Federal Unemployment Tax Act) · 26 U.S.C. § 6212 · 26 U.S.C. § 7421 · 28 U.S.C. § 1341

Relies on Great Lakes Dredge & Dock Co. v. Huffman · United States v. Silk · Miller v. Standard Nut Margarine Co. · Matthews v. Rodgers

Cited together with Bob Jones University v. Simon · Alexander v. "Americans United" Inc. · Miller v. Standard Nut Margarine Co. · Flora v. United States · South Carolina v. Regan

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 2,571 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “if it is clear that under no circumstances could the Government ultimately prevail”
    138 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[N]o suit for the purpose of restraining the assessment or collection of any tax shall be maintained in any court by any person, whether or not such person is the person against whom such tax was assessed.”
    85 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““‘The existing practice of the Federal courts in entertaining tax-injunction suits against State officers makes it possible for foreign corporations doing business in such States to withhold from them . . . taxes in such vast amounts and for such long periods of time as to seriously disrupt State and county finances. The pressing needs of these States for this tax money is so great that in many instances they have been compelled to compromise these suits, as a result of which substantial portions of the tax have been lost to the States ....’” 370 U.S. at 7, n. 6 (emphasis added).”
    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.