Brounstein v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
979 F.2d 952 · 1992
Citation profile
26 federal appellate · 3 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 65 later decisions — most recently August 2023 · most notably Purcell v. United States (1993), Barnett v. Internal Revenue Service (1993)
26 federal appellate · 3 district · 2 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
Applies 26 U.S.C. § 3102 (Federal Insurance Contributions Act) · 26 U.S.C. § 6671 · 26 U.S.C. § 6672 · 26 U.S.C. § 7501 · 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 1345 · 28 U.S.C. § 1346 (Federal Tort Claims Act)
Relies on Slodov v. United States · Interstate Circuit, Inc. v. City of Dallas · Howard v. United States · Harrington v. United States · Psaty v. United States
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 65 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) contents of the corporate bylaws, (2) ability to sign checks on the company’s bank account, (3) signature on the employer’s federal quarterly and other tax returns, (4) payment of other creditors in lieu of the United States, (5) identity of officers, directors, and principal stockholders in the firm, (6) identity of individuals in charge of hiring and discharging employees, and (7) identity of individuals in charge of the firm’s financial affairs.”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[o]nce the IRS assesses a tax, a rebutta-ble presumption arises that the assessment is correct. Psaty v. United States, 442 F.2d 1154, 1160 (3d Cir.1971). Thus, the IRS’s introduction of certified copies of the assessment before the district court shiftfs] to [the taxpayer] the burden of going forward with evidence to show that the assessment against him under section 6672 was incorrect by establishing either: (1) that he was not a responsible person within the meaning of the statute; or (2) that he did not willfully fail to pay the amount due to the IRS. Quattrone Accountants, Inc. v. IRS, 895 F.2d 921, 927 (3d Cir.1990).”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(a) General rule. — Any person required to collect, truthfully account for, and pay over any tax imposed by this title who willfully fails to collect such tax, or truthfully account for and pay over such tax, or willfully attempts in any manner to evade or defeat any such tax or the payment thereof, shall, in addition to other penalties provided by law, be liable to a penalty equal to the total amount of the tax evaded, or not collected, or not accounted for and paid over.”
3 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.