Matuszak v. Commissioner’s Empirical Analysis
862 F.3d 192 · 2017
Citation profile
3 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1341 (White-Collar Crime Penalty Enhancement Act of 2002) · 18 U.S.C. § 3282 · 26 U.S.C. § 6013 · 26 U.S.C. § 6015 · 26 U.S.C. § 6213 · 26 U.S.C. § 6330 · 26 U.S.C. § 7206 · 26 U.S.C. § 7482
Relies on Arbaugh v. Y & H Corp. · Kontrick v. Ryan · Gonzalez v. Thaler · Henderson v. Shinseki · Henderson v. Shinseki
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“jurisdiction[ ] to determine the appropriate relief available to the [taxpayer] if such petition is filed ... not later than the close of the 90th day after the date described in clause (i)(I).”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“represents the most obvious example of a jurisdictional rule, because Congress clearly and repeatedly expressed that it imposes a jurisdictional limit on the Tax Court's authority.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“expressly conditioned the Tax Court's jurisdiction on the timely filing of a petition”
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.