Nelson v. Regan’s Empirical Analysis
1983
Citation profile
12 federal appellate · 7 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 43 later decisions — most recently June 2016 · most notably Nelson v. Regan (1984), McClelland v. Massinga (1986)
12 federal appellate · 7 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. § 6305 · 26 U.S.C. § 6401 · 26 U.S.C. § 6402 · 26 U.S.C. § 7421 · 28 U.S.C. § 2201 · 42 U.S.C. § 664 (§ 464 of the Social Security Act of 1935)
Relies on Mathews v. Eldridge · Morrissey v. Brewer · Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co. · Edelman v. Jordan · Parratt v. Taylor
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 43 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(a) Procedure applicable; distribution Upon receiving notice from a State agency administering a plan approved under this part that a named individual owes past-due support which has been assigned to such State pursuant to section 602(a)(26) of this title, the Secretary of the Treasury shall determine whether any amounts, as refunds of Federal taxes paid, are payable to such individual (regardless of whether such individual filed a tax return as a married or unmarried individual). If the Secretary of the Treasury finds that any such amount is payable, he shall withhold from such refunds an amount equal to the past-due support, and pay such amount to the State agency (together with notice of the individual’s home address) for distribution in accordance with section 657(b)(3) of this title. (c) Definition As used in this part the term “past-due support” means the amount of a delinquency, determined under a court order, or an order of an administrative process established under State law, for support and maintenance of a child, or of a child and the parent with whom the child is living.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“First, the private interest that will be affected by the official action; second, the risk of erroneous deprivation of such interest through the procedures used, and the probable value, if any, of additional or substitute procedural safeguards; and finally, the Government’s interest, including the function involved and the fiscal and administrative burdens that the additional or substitute procedural requirements would entail.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“§ 6402. Authority to make credits or refunds * * * * * * (c) Offset of past-due support against overpayments. The amount of any overpayment to be refunded to the person making the overpayment shall be reduced by the amount of any past-due support (as defined in section 464(c) of the Social Security Act [ 42 U.S.C. § 664 (c) ] ) owed by that person of which the Secretary has been notified by a State in accordance with section 464 of the Social Security Act [ 42 U.S.C. § 664 ]. The Secretary shall remit the amount by which the overpayment is so reduced to the State to which such support has been assigned and notify the person making the overpayment that so much of the overpayment as was necessary to satisfy his obligation for past-due support has been paid to the State. This subsection shall be applied to an overpayment prior to its being credited to a person’s future liability for an internal revenue tax.”
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.