green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 2×
11.0 score
G Cite
Treatment trajectory · 1979 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1979
2002
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 50 distinct citers.
discussed
Cited "but see"
District of Columbia Common Cause v. District of Columbia
(2×)
But see Frissell v. Rizzo, 597 F.2d 840, 850 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 841 , 100 S.Ct. 82 , 62 L.Ed.2d 54 (1979). 3.
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
May v. Internal Revenue Service
(2×)
e conclude that the provisions of section 6103 dealing with the disclosure of return information to a taxpayer with a material interest therein satisfy the requirements of exemption .
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Newark Branch, National Ass'n for the Advancement of Colored People v. Township of West Orange
on a deeper level, the court's standing rules recognize a constitutional preference for solving social and political problems by consent.
discussed
Cited "see"
Duke Street Ltd. P'ship v. BOARD OF CTY. COMMISSIONERS CALVERT CTY.
(2×)
See National Advertising Company v. Raleigh, 947 F.2d 1158 (4th Cir.1991), cert. denied, 504 U.S. 931 , 112 S.Ct. 1997 , 118 L.Ed.2d 593 (1992), Bireline v. Seagondollar, 567 F.2d 260 (4th Cir.1977), cert. denied 444 U.S. 842 , 100 S.Ct. 83 , 62 L.Ed.2d 54 (1979).
discussed
Cited "see"
Henry Thomas Turpin v. United States
The failure to pay trust fund taxes cannot be willful unless there is either “knowledge of nonpayment or reckless disregard of whether the payments were being made.” Teel v. United States, 529 F.2d 903, 905 (9th Cir.1976); accord, e.g., Mazo v, United States, 591 F.2d 1151, 1155 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 842 (1979).
cited
Cited "see"
K.E. North, Plaintiff-Counter-Defendant-Appellant v. United States of America, Defendant-Counter-Claimant-Appellee
See Mazo v. United States, 591 F.2d 1151, 1157 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 842 (1979); Carter v. United States, 717 F.Supp. 188, 193-94 (S.D.N.Y.1989).
cited
Cited "see"
International Paper Company v. Town of Jay
See Frissell v. Rizzo, 597 F.2d 840, 845 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 841 , 100 S.Ct. 82 , 62 L.Ed.2d 54 (1979).
discussed
Cited "see"
Bradley v. Carydale Enterprises
(2×)
See Bireline v. Seagondollar, 567 F.2d 260, 263 (4th Cir.1977), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 842 , 100 S.Ct. 83 , 62 L.Ed.2d 54 (1979); Cox v. Stanton, 529 F.2d 47, 50 (4th Cir.1975); Sabet v. Eastern Va. Medical Auth., 611 F.Supp. 388, 397 (E.D.Va.), aff’d, 775 F.2d 1266 (4th Cir.1985). 10 .
discussed
Cited "see"
Peterkin v. Jeffes
See generally, Frissell v. Rizzo, 597 F.2d 840 (3d Cir.1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 841 , 100 S.Ct. 82 , 62 L.Ed.2d 54 (1979) (whether a litigant has standing not dependent on the merits of litigant's contentions, but on sufficiency of litigant's concern with subject matter, and exposure to actual or threatened injury); Borelli v. City of Reading, 532 F.2d 950 (3d Cir.1976) (question of standing generally determined from face of the complaint) 26 This Court has repeatedly analyzed access to courts and legal assistance claims without reference to an actual injury showing.
discussed
Cited "see"
Peterkin v. Jeffes
See generally, Frissell v. Rizzo, 597 F.2d 840 (3d Cir.1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 841 , 100 S.Ct. 82 , 62 L.Ed.2d 54 (1979) (whether a litigant has standing not dependent on the merits of litigant’s contentions, but on sufficiency of litigant’s concern with subject matter, and exposure to actual or threatened injury); Borelli v. City of Reading, 532 F.2d 950 (3d Cir.1976) (question of standing generally determined from face of the complaint). .
discussed
Cited "see"
Causey v. United States
(2×)
See Mazo v. United States, 591 F.2d 1151, 1157 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 842 , 100 S.Ct. 82 , 62 L.Ed.2d 54 (1979).
cited
Cited "see"
David W. Ware v. Lawyers Title Insurance Corporation G. T. Wilson, Jr. Buchart-Horn Inc.
See Bireline v. Seaoondollar, 567 F.2d 260 , 263 (4th Cir. 1977), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 842 (1979).
examined
Cited "see"
United States v. Terrell (In Re Terrell)
(4×)
See, Mazo, supra at 1151-1156 (5th Cir.1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 842 , 100 S.Ct. 82 , 62 L.Ed.2d 54 (1979), wherein the Fifth Circuit upheld the granting of a summary judgment to the United States in a similar responsible person case.
cited
Cited "see"
In Re Morrison
See Frissell v. Rizzo, 597 F.2d 840, 843-45 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 841 , 100 S.Ct. 82 , 62 L.Ed.2d 54 (1979). 10 .
discussed
Cited "see"
L. Ray Wood v. United States
(2×)
See Mazo v. United States, 591 F.2d 1151, 1155-56 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 842 , 100 S.Ct. 82 , 62 L.Ed.2d 54 (1979); Liddon v. United States, 448 F.2d 509, 512-13 (5th Cir.1871), cert. denied, 406 U.S. 918 , 92 S.Ct. 1769 , 32 L.Ed.2d 117 (1972).
discussed
Cited "see"
Robert J. Adams, Jr. v. Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission of the Supreme Court of Illinois, and Carl R. Rolewick
(2×)
See Citizens Energy Coalition of Indiana v. Sendak, 594 F.2d 1158, 1162-63 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 842 , 100 S.Ct. 83 , 62 L.Ed.2d 54 (1979).
examined
Cited "see"
Church of Scientology of California v. Internal Revenue Service
(4×)
Moody v. IRS, 654 F.2d 795 , 797 & n. 4 (D.C.Cir.1981); see Chamberlain v. Kurtz, 589 F.2d 827 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 842 , 100 S.Ct. 82 , 62 L.Ed.2d 54 (1979); Fruehauf Corp. v. IRS, 566 F.2d 574 (6th Cir.1977); see also Zale Corp. v. IRS, 481 F.Supp. 486 , 490 n. 13 (D.D.C.1979) 5 My reading of Section 6103 and FOIA nevertheless differs from the reasoning of Zale Corp. v. IRS, 481 F.Supp. 486 (D.D.C.1979), relied upon by King.
discussed
Cited "see"
Adams v. Attorney Registration & Disciplinary Commission
(2×)
See Citizens Energy Coalition of Indiana v. Sendak, 594 F.2d 1158, 1162-63 (7th Cir. 1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 842 , 100 S.Ct. 83 , 62 L.Ed.2d 54 (1979).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Texas Heart Institute
(2×)
See Chamberlain v. Kurtz, 589 F.2d 827, 835 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 842 , 100 S.Ct. 82 , 62 L.Ed.2d 54 (1979). 54 The real issue presented is not whether the taxpayer perceived the agent's actions as threats, but whether there is a legitimate purpose for the investigation.
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Texas Heart Institute
(2×)
See Chamberlain v. Kurtz, 589 F.2d 827, 835 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 842 , 100 S.Ct. 82 , 62 L.Ed.2d 54 (1979).
examined
Cited "see"
American Friends Service Committee v. William H. Webster, Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation, (Three Cases)
(4×)
See Chamberlain v. Kurtz, 589 F.2d 827, 835 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 842 , 100 S.Ct. 82 , 62 L.Ed.2d 54 (1979). 67 154 Section 6103 is a formidable law restricting the use of records.
discussed
Cited "see"
ca4 1983
(2×)
See Bireline v. Seagondollar, 567 F.2d 260, 263 (4 Cir.1977) (the "federal rule establishes as the time of accrual that point in time when the plaintiff knows or has reason to know of the injury which is the basis of his action"), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 842 , 100 S.Ct. 83 , 62 L.Ed.2d 54 (1979).
discussed
Cited "see"
Randall ex rel. Liskey v. Lukhard
(2×)
See Bireline v. Seagondollar, 567 F.2d 260, 263 (4 Cir.1977) (the “federal rule estab lishes as the time of accrual that point in time when the plaintiff knows or has reason to know of the injury which is the basis of his action”), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 842 , 100 S.Ct. 83 , 62 L.Ed.2d 54 (1979).
discussed
Cited "see"
Green v. Internal Revenue Service
(2×)
See, Chamberlain v. Kurtz, 589 F.2d 827 (5th Cir.), cert. den., 444 U.S. 842 , 100 S.Ct. 82 , 62 L.Ed.2d 54 (1979); Barney v. Internal Revenue Service, 618 F.2d 1268 (8th Cir.1980); Fruehauf Corp. v. Internal Revenue Service, 566 F.2d 574 (6th Cir. 1977).
discussed
Cited "see"
Sharon L. King v. Internal Revenue Service and Jerome Kurtz, Commissioner of Internal Revenue
(2×)
See Chamberlain v. Kurtz, 589 F.2d 827 (5th Cir. 1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 842 , 100 S.Ct. 82 , 62 L.Ed.2d 54 ; Fruehauf Corp. v. I.
discussed
Cited "see"
Sabalos v. Regan
(2×)
See Chamberlain v. Kurtz, 589 F.2d 827, 842-43 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 842 , 100 S.Ct. 82 , 62 L.Ed.2d 54 (1979); Pope v. United States, 459 F.Supp. 426, 429 (S.D.Tex.1977), aff’d per curiam, 585 F.2d 802 (5th Cir. 1978).
discussed
Cited "see"
Shearn Moody, Jr. v. Internal Revenue Service
(2×)
See Chamberlain v. Kurtz, 589 F.2d 827, 838-39 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 842 , 100 S.Ct. 82 , 62 L.Ed.2d 54 (1979) (section 6103 of the Internal Revenue Code is a statute exempting material from disclosure within the meaning of exemption 3 of the FOIA). 5 .
discussed
Cited "see"
James D. Cole v. Mary Franklin Carter Cole, Dale Padgett, J. H. Padgett
(2×)
See Bireline v. Seagondollar, 567 F.2d 260 (4th Cir. 1977), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 842 , 100 S.Ct. 83 , 62 L.Ed.2d 54 (1979).
cited
Cited "see"
US Oil Co., Inc. v. Koch Refining Co.
See Newman Oil Co. v. Atlantic Richfield Co., 597 F.2d 275 (Em.App.) cert. denied, Atlantic Richfield Co. v. Newman Oil Co., 444 U.S. 842 , 100 S.Ct. 84 , 62 L.Ed.2d 55 (1979).
discussed
Cited "see"
McSurely v. McAdams
(2×)
See Chamberlain v. Kurtz, 589 F.2d 827, 834 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 842 , 100 S.Ct. 82 , 62 L.Ed.2d 54 (1979).
cited
Cited "see"
Zale Corp. v. United States Internal Revenue Service
See Chamberlain v. Kurtz, 589 F.2d 827 (5th Cir. 1978), cert. denied,-Ü.S.-, 100 S.Ct. 82 , 62 L.Ed.2d 54 (1979).
discussed
Cited "see"
Shakman v. Democratic Organization of Cook Cty.
See Silva v. Bell, 605 F.2d 978, 984 (7th Cir. 1979). *1329 Frissell v. Rizzo, 597 F.2d 840, 844 (3d Cir.) (in absence of any allegation that a newspaper had actually been inhibited in its reporting of the news by mayor’s action in denying customary public advertising to the paper as a reprisal for the publication of unfavorable news articles, or that the newspaper was in some manner prevented from asserting its own first amendment rights, the taxpayer-citizen lacked standing to sue to vindicate the newspaper’s rights), cert denied, - U.S. -, 100 S.Ct. 82 , 62 L.Ed.2d 54 (1979).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Noffke v. United States
(2×)
Kobus v. United States, 103 Fed.Cl. at 588 (citing Godfrey v. United States, 748 F.2d at 1577 ); see also Godfrey v. United States, 748 F.2d at 1577 (quoting Mazo v. United States, 591 F.2d 1151 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 842 , 100 S.Ct. 82 , 62 L.Ed.2d 54 (1979)) (“The willfulness requirement is satisfied ‘if the responsible person acts with a reckless disregard of a known or obvious risk that trust funds may not be remitted to the Government, ... such as by failing to investigate or to correct mismanagement after being notified that withholding taxes have not been duly remitted.�…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Kobus v. United States
(2×)
See, e.g., Mazo v. United States, 591 F.2d 1151, 1155 (5th Cir.1979), cert, denied, 444 U.S. 842 , 100 S.Ct. 82 , 62 L.Ed.2d 54 (1979); Brinshele v. United States, 88 Fed.Cl. 334, 339 (2009) (stating that, under § 6672, the plaintiff bears the burden of proof “both for his own claim and against the government’s counterclaim”).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Robertson v. Internal Revenue Service of the United States (In Re Robertson)
(2×)
See also, Mazo v. United States, 591 F.2d 1151, 1154 (5th Cir.1979), cert. denied 444 U.S. 842 , 100 S.Ct. 82 , 62 L.Ed.2d 54 (1979).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Mahler v. United States
The inquiry under Section 6672 "focuses on whether an individual could have exerted influence, and delegation or avoidance of duties will not deflect its scope." Fiataruolo, 8 F.3d at 939 (emphasis added); see also Maw v. United States, 591 F.2d 1151, 1157 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 444 U.s. 842, 100 S.Ct. 82 , 62 L.Ed.2d 54 (1979); Schwinger v. United States, 652 F.Supp. 464, 469-70 (E.D.N.Y.1987).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Phillips v. United States Internal Revenue Service
(2×)
See also Malloy v. U.S., 17 F.3d 329 , 332 (11th Cir.1994) ("The willfulness requirement is satisfied if the responsible person acts with a reckless disregard of a known or obvious risk that the trust funds may not be remitted to the Government, such as by failing to investigate or to correct mismanagement after being notified that withholding taxes have not been duly admitted”) (emphasis in the original), citing Mazo v. United States, 591 F.2d 1151, 1154 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 842 , 100 S.Ct. 82 , 62 L.Ed.2d 54 (1979); Wood v. United States, 808 F.2d 411, 415 (5th Cir.1987) ("A …
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Fontenot v. United States (In re Fontenot)
(2×)
Wood, 808 F.2d at 415; see also Mazo v. United States, 591 F.2d 1151, 1154 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 842 , 100 S.Ct. 82 , 62 L.Ed.2d 54 (1979) (reckless disregard includes failure to investigate or to correct mismanagement after being notified that taxes were due.) Mere negligence, however, does not establish willfulness under the statute.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Raba v. United States
(2×)
See also Mazo v. United States, 591 F.2d 1151 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 842 , 100 S.Ct. 82 , 62 L.Ed.2d 54 (1979).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Raba v. U.S.
(2×)
See also Mazo v. United States, 591 F.2d 1151 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 842 , 100 S.Ct. 82 , 62 L.Ed.2d 54 (1979).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Dan O. Davis, Plaintiff-Counter-Claim-Defendant-Appellant v. United States of America, Defendant-Counter-Claimant-Appellee
(2×)
In the latter case, the Supreme Court said “there is no question that § 6672 is applicable to them.” Id. at 246, 98 S.Ct. at 1784 ; see also Mazo v. United States, 591 F.2d 1151, 1154 (5th Cir.) (Slodov “implicitly affirms [Teel’s and Maggy’s] conclusions because the [Supreme] Court assumes at the outset that a penalty may be exacted from a person who was responsible both during the period withholding tax liability accrued and thereafter”), cer t. denied, 444 U.S. 842 , 100 S.Ct. 82 , 62 L.Ed.2d 54 (1979).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Dennis J. Turnbull v. United States of America, Defendant-Counter v. Johnny Foster, Counter
(2×)
See, e.g., Mazo v. United States, 591 F.2d 1151, 1154 (5th Cir.) (reckless disregard includes failure to investigate or to correct mismanagement after being notified that taxes were due), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 842 , 100 S.Ct. 82 , 62 L.Ed.2d 54 (1979).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
In Re Orlando Investors, L.P.
See also Frissell v. Rizzo, 597 F.2d 840 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 841 , 100 S.Ct. 82 , 62 L.Ed.2d 54 (1979).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Mike Gustin v. United States of America, Internal Revenue Service
(2×)
Wood, 808 F.2d at 415 ; see also Mazo v. United States, 591 F.2d 1151, 1154 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 842 , 100 S.Ct. 82 , 62 L.Ed.2d 54 (1979) (reckless disregard includes failure to investigate or to correct mismanagement after being notified that taxes were due).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Competitive Enterprise Institute, Fred L. Smith, Jr. And Glenda Hill v. U.S. Department of Transportation
Basiardanes v. City of Galveston, 682 F.2d 1203, 1211-12 (5th Cir.1982) (“Recipients of protected communication have standing only if there is a speaker who wishes to express himself or herself.”); see also Frissell v. Rizzo, 597 F.2d 840, 847-48 (3d Cir.) (“the hearer [must] demonstrate injury to a relationship with an affected speaker”), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 841 , 100 S.Ct. 82 , 62 L.Ed.2d 54 (1979); Gregg v. Barrett, 771 F.2d 539, 547-48 (D.C.Cir.1985) (“The right to receive information, however, is not established in every case where a person wishes to receive information.”).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Robert W. Sawyer v. United States
(2×)
See also, Mazo v. United States, 591 F.2d 1151, 1154 (5th Cir.1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 842 , 100 S.Ct. 82 , 62 L.Ed.2d 54 ; Garsky v. United States, 600 F.2d 86, 91 (7th Cir. 1979).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Hobson v. Government of the Virgin Islands Fire Division
See also Bireline v. Seagondollar, 567 F.2d 260, 263 (4th Cir. 1977), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 842 (1979).
examined
Cited "see, e.g."
Jay B. White v. Internal Revenue Service
(4×)
See also Chamberlain v. Kurtz, 589 F.2d 827 (5th Cir.1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 842 , 100 S.Ct. 82 , 62 L.Ed.2d 54 (1979) [where it was concluded "that the provisions of section 6103 dealing with the disclosure of return information to a taxpayer with a material interest therein satisfy the requirements of Exemption 3" to FOIA.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Rand v. Brezenoff
(2×)
See e.g., Bireline v. Seagondollar, 567 F.2d 260 (4th Cir.1977), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 842 , 100 S.Ct. 83 , 62 L.Ed.2d 54 (1979).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Education/instruccion, Inc. v. United States Department of Housing and Urban Development
(2×)
See also Chamberlain v. Kurtz, 589 F.2d 827, 842-43 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 842 , 100 S.Ct. 82 , 62 L.Ed.2d 54 (1979); Blue v. Bureau of Prisons, 570 F.2d 529 (5th Cir. 1978); Cuneo v. Rumsfeld, 553 F.2d 1360 (D.C.Cir.1977).
Lattimore
v.
United States
v.
United States
No. 78-1891.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 1, 1979.
Cited by 26 opinions | Published
Citer courts: W.D. Missouri (2) · D. New Jersey (1)
C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.