Furst v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
678 F.2d 147 · 1982
Citation profile
12 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 45 later decisions — most recently July 2016 · most notably Minehan v. United States (2007), Gustin v. United States (1989)
12 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 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
Relies on Montana v. United States · Commissioner v. Sunnen · Blonder-Tongue Laboratories, Inc. v. University of Illinois Foundation · Moses Lake Homes, Inc. v. Grant County · Tait v. Western Maryland Railway Co.
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 45 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"(a) Period of limitation on filing claim "Claim for credit or refund of an overpayment of any tax imposed by this title in respect of which tax the taxpayer is required to file a return shall be filed by the taxpayer within 3 years from the time the return was filed or 2 years from the time the tax was paid, whichever of such periods expires the later, or if no return was filed by the taxpayer, within 2 years from the time the tax was paid. Claim for credit or refund of an overpayment of any tax imposed by this title which is required to be paid by means of a stamp shall be filed by the taxpayer within 3 years from the time the tax was paid.””
7 later decisions quote this exact passage“An application for a tentative carryback adjustment does not constitute a claim for credit or refund * * * [so that] no suit may be maintained in any court for the recovery of any tax based upon such application. The filing of an application for a tentative carryback adjustment will not constitute the filing of a claim for credit or refund within the meaning of section 6511 for purposes of determining whether a claim for credit or refund was filed prior to the expiration of the applicable period of limitation.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage“... It has long been recognized, however, that a formal claim for refund is not needed; all that is required is a time ly informal claim. United States v. Kales, 314 U.S. 186 , 62 S.Ct. 214 , 86 L.Ed. 132 (1941). Such informal notice serves the same function as a formal refund claim, “to put the Commissioner on notice that a right is being asserted with respect to an overpayment of tax * * Newton v. United States, 143 Ct.Cl. 293, 299 , 163 F.Supp. 614, 618 (1958). This enables the IRS, if it wishes, to begin an examination of the claim. American Radiator & Standard Sanitary Corp. v. United States, 162 Ct.Cl. 106, 114 , 318 F.2d 915, 920 (1963). ... It is all the facts and circumstances that will determine whether a timely informal claim for refund has been filed.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage
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.