Internal Revenue Service v. Brickell Investment Corp.’s Empirical Analysis
922 F.2d 696 · 1991
Citation profile
13 federal appellate · 2 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 57 later decisions — most recently March 2019 · most notably Rasbury v. Internal Revenue Service (1994), United States v. Arkison (1994)
13 federal appellate · 2 district ·
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 11 U.S.C. § 1104 · 11 U.S.C. § 1107 · 11 U.S.C. § 1108 · 11 U.S.C. § 704 · 26 U.S.C. § 7430 · 28 U.S.C. § 157 · 28 U.S.C. § 1915 · 28 U.S.C. § 1927
Relies on Northern Pipeline Construction Co. v. Marathon Pipe Line Co. · Wood v. Wood · Becker's Motor Transportation Inc Needham's Motor Service Inc v. Department of Treasury Internal Revenue Service · Gower v. Farmers Home Administration
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 57 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(a) In general. In any administrative or court proceeding which is brought by or against the U.S. in connection with the determination, collection or refund of any tax, interest or penalty under this title, the prevailing party may be awarded a judgment or settlement ...”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage“(d) Actions involving summonses, levies, liens, jeopardy and termination assessments, etc. (1) A party has not exhausted the administrative remedies available within the Internal Revenue Service with respect to a matter other than one to which paragraph (b) or (c) of this section applies (including summonses, levies, liens, and jeopardy and termination assessments) unless, prior to filing an action in a court of the United States (including the Tax Court and the Court of Federal Claims)— (i) The party submits to the district director of the district having jurisdiction over the dispute a written claim for relief reciting facts and circumstances sufficient to show the nature of the relief requested and that the party is entitled to such relief; and (ii) The district director has denied the claim for relief in writing or failed to act on the claim within a reasonable period after such claim is received by the district director.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“The award of attorney’s fees was made against the I.R.S. because the bankruptcy court determined that the I.R.S. was “substantially unjustified” in filing its proof of claim ... It was this claim in which the debtors prevailed in and which was the basis for the attorney’s fee award. See In re Brickell Invest. Corp., 96 B.R. 400 (Bankr.S.D.Fla.1989).”
1 later decision 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.