The T. H. Rogers Lumber Company v. James Bruce Apel, and United States of America’s Empirical Analysis
468 F.2d 14 · 1972
Citation profile
21 federal appellate · 6 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 35 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 1995 · most notably United States 77-1359 v. Kimbell Foods Inc (1979), Kimbell Foods, Inc. v. Republic National Bank (1977)
21 federal appellate · 6 district · 2 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. § 6323
Relies on Clearfield Trust Co. v. United States · United States v. City of New Britain · Armstrong v. United States · United States v. Security Trust & Savings Bank · Shoup Voting Machine Corp. v. Datamedia Computer Service, Inc.
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 35 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The fact that Congress chose to subordinate tax liens furnishes no evidence that it intended to subordinate all other federal liens to interests created by the laws of the individual states. The 1966 Act applied only to tax debts, and the reports of the House and the Senate speak only of subordinating federal unrecorded tax liens to mechanics’ liens. There is not the slightest indication of the intent of Congress to subordinate other claims.” 468 F.2d at 18 .”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““We turn now to the question as to what is meant by the federal ‘first in time, first in right’ rule. As previously noted, the non-federal lien must be choate at the crucial time in order to successfully compete with a federal lien. United States v. New Britain, 347 U.S. 81, 84 , 74 S.Ct. 367 , 98 L.Ed. 520 [1954], This requirement can be met only if the claim is final; thát is, not subject to a judicial contest as to its amount, and also only if it is enforceable by summary proceedings. Thus, a state statutory lien must be specific and perfected on the date that the federal lien was recorded. This determination must be made in accordance with federal law. And so, the state characterization of the lien is not conclusive as against the federal government. [Footnotes omitted].””
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.