Bruno v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
547 F.2d 71 · 1976
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 3 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently January 2015 · most notably Oropallo v. United States (1993), Chernin v. United States (1998)
6 federal appellate · 3 district ·
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. § 6511 · 26 U.S.C. § 7422 · 28 U.S.C. § 1346 (Federal Tort Claims Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 2401 · 28 U.S.C. § 41
Relies on United States v. Michel · Kansas City, Missouri, a Municipal Corporation v. Federal Pacific Electric Company, Kansas City, Missouri, a Municipal Corporation v. General Electric Company · Emmett v. Eastern Dispensary & Casualty Hospital · Childers v. United States · United States v. Rochelle
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 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“No suit or proceeding shall be maintained in any court for the recovery of any internal revenue tax alleged to have been erroneously or illegally assessed or collected, or of any penalty claimed to have been collected without authority, or of any sum alleged to have been excessive or in any manner wrongfully collected, until a claim for refund or credit has been duly filed with the Secretary, according to the provisions of law in that regard, and the regulations of the Secretary established in pursuance thereof.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“(a) The district courts shall have original jurisdiction, concurrent with the Court of Claims, of: (1) Any civil action against the United States for the recovery of any internal-revenue tax alleged to have been erroneously or illegally assessed or collected, or any penalty claimed to have been collected without authority or any sum alleged to have been excessive or in any manner wrongfully collected under the internal-revenue laws; ...”
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.