Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 41 F.3d 1109 - Thomas v. United States

Thomas v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

41 F.3d 1109 · 1994

Citation profile

40
cited by 40 later decisions
4
states following
September 2012
most recently cited

16 federal appellate · 1 district · 6 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 40 later decisions — most recently September 2012 · most notably United States v. McKee (2007), Taylor v. Internal Revenue Service (1995)

16 federal appellate · 1 district · 6 state decisions

290199420002010decided

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. § 3102 (Federal Insurance Contributions Act) · 26 U.S.C. § 6672 · 28 U.S.C. § 2111

Relies on Slodov v. United States · Universal Builders, Inc. v. Clark · Robert W. Monday v. United States of America, and Third-Party v. John A. Monday, Third-Party · Clark v. Florida · United States v. Harris

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

  1. “could have impeded the flow of business to the extent necessary to prevent the corporation from squandering the taxes it withheld from its employees.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[this court] will not set aside the jury's verdict if there is a reasonable basis in the record which supports that verdict.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “if he retains sufficient control of corporate finances that he can allocate corporate funds to pay the corporation’s other debts in preference to the corporation’s withholding tax obligations. To be responsible under section 6672, a person need not necessarily have exclusive control over the disbursal of funds or have the final word as to which creditors should be paid so long as he has significant control.”
    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.