Miller v. Volk’s Empirical Analysis
2005
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 26 U.S.C. § 280H · 26 U.S.C. § 441 · 26 U.S.C. § 444
Relies on Zwack v. Kraus Bros. · 70 Ohio App. 2d 93 - Richard v. Staehle · Thomas v. Cleary · Lien v. McGladrey & Pullen · 212 Ill. App. 3d 66 - Dail v. Adamson
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“no proof was offered that the interest paid to the IRS on the deficiency exceeded the value to the plaintiffs of having use of the money in the meantime. There was, in other words, no proof of actionable damages.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Frank v. Lockwood
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.