Sorenson v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
521 F.2d 325 · 1975
Citation profile
40 federal appellate · 5 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 100 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2023 · most notably Slodov v. United States (1978), Mazo v. United States (1979)
40 federal appellate · 5 district · 3 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. § 6672 · 26 U.S.C. § 7202
Relies on Spies v. United States · McGautha v. California · Universal Builders, Inc. v. Clark · Robert W. Monday v. United States of America, and Third-Party v. John A. Monday, Third-Party · Bloom 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 100 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]he payment of net wages in circumstances where there are no available funds in excess of net wages from which to make withholding is a willful failure" to collect and pay over under § 6672. We reach this conclusion because under such circumstances there exists an intentional act to prefer creditors holding wage claims over tax claims held by the United States. It is clear that a “voluntary, conscious, and .intentional act to prefer other creditors over the United States” constitutes a willful failure to pay over; Employees to whom wages are owed are but a particular type of creditor. There is no basis in law for preferring the wage obligation to them over the withholding obligation to the Government. One who has voluntarily disabled himself from meeting this tax obligation by using all funds for wages has engaged in a "willful" act.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Any person required to collect, truthfully account for, and pay over any tax imposed by this title who willfully fails to collect such tax, or truthfully account for and pay over such tax, or willfully attempts in any manner to evade or defeat any such tax or the payment thereof, shall, in addition to other penalties provided by law, be liable to a penalty equal to the total amount of the tax evaded, or not collected, or not accounted for and paid over.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]o establish willfulness the Government must establish beyond a reasonable doubt that at the time payment was due the taxpayer possessed sufficient funds to enable him to meet his obligation or that the lack of sufficient funds on such date was created by (or was the result of) a voluntary and intentional act without justification in view of all the financial circumstances of the taxpayer.”
2 later decisions 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.