Moyer v. Mathas’s Empirical Analysis
458 F.2d 431 · 1972
Citation profile
18 federal appellate · 4 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 42 later decisions — most recently November 2021 · most notably Kapp v. Naturelle, Inc. (1979), United States v. Weintraub (1979)
18 federal appellate · 4 district · 1 state decisions
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. § 6321 (Federal Tax Lien Act of 1966) · 26 U.S.C. § 6322 · 26 U.S.C. § 6323 · 26 U.S.C. § 6501 · 26 U.S.C. § 6502 · 26 U.S.C. § 7403 · 26 U.S.C. § 7426
Relies on Morris v. Jones · Falik v. United States · 231 F. Supp. 718 - Quinn v. Hook · Graham v. United States
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 42 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(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.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“. . . we must be certain that a third party does not become prey to the traps and tricks in the tax collector's bag, (b)ut at the same time we must assure the tax gatherer that his gatherings be both speedy and unevadable, . . . .”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(a) Actions permitted.— (1) Wrongful levy. — If a levy has been made on property or property has been sold pursuant to a levy, any person (other than the person against whom is assessed the tax out of which such levy arose) who claims an interest in or lien on such property and that such property was wrongfully levied upon may bring a civil action against the United States in a district court of the United States. Such action may be brought without regard to whether such property has been surrendered to or sold by the Secretary or his delegate. (2) Surplus proceeds. — If property has been sold pursuant to a levy, any person (other than the person against whom is assessed the tax out of which such levy arose) who claims an interest in or lien on such property junior to that of the United States and to be legally entitled to the surplus proceeds of such sale may bring a civil action against the United States in a district court of the United States. (3) Substituted sale proceeds. — If property has been sold pursuant to an agreement described in section 6325(b)(3) (relating to substitution of proceeds of a sale), any person who claims to be legally entitled to all or any part of the amount held as a fund pursuant to such agreement may bring a civil action against the United States in a district court of the United States. (b) Adjudication. — The district court shall have jurisdiction to grant only such of the following forms of relief as may be appropriate in the circumstances: ”
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.