Wilson v. Commissioner’s Empirical Analysis
705 F.3d 980 · 2013
Citation profile
4 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently May 2023 · most notably Danielson v. Flores (2013), Woods v. Carey (2013)
4 federal appellate ·
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 12 U.S.C. § 1828 · 12 U.S.C. § 1849 (§ 11 of the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956) · 12 U.S.C. § 5567 · 15 U.S.C. § 2087 · 15 U.S.C. § 3414 (Sherman Antitrust Act) · 15 U.S.C. § 45 (§ 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act of 1914) · 15 U.S.C. § 77I (§ 9 of the Securities Act of 1933) · 16 U.S.C. § 823B (§ 31 of the Federal Power Act of 1920)
Relies on Citizens to Preserve Overton Park, Inc. v. Volpe · Abbott Laboratories v. Gardner · Northern Pipeline Construction Co. v. Marathon Pipe Line Co. · Securities and Exchange Commission v. Chenery Corporation · Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Ventura
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 31 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The first step in interpreting a statute is to determine whether the language at issue has a plain and unambiguous meaning with regard to the particular dispute in the case. This often requires examin[ing] not only the specific provision at issue, but also the structure of the statute as a whole, including its object and policy. If the plain meaning of the statute is unambiguous, that meaning controls. If the statutory language is ambiguous, then we consult legislative history.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“In the absence of any limiting language directing the Tax Court to consider only that evidence before the Commissioner during the administrative phase of review, “determining” the validity of a taxpayer’s request for innocent spouse relief in light of “all the facts and circumstances” suggests a de novo scope of evidentiary review ....”
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.