26 U.S.C. § 6064
Signature presumed authentic
The fact that an individual’s name is signed to a return, statement, or other document shall be prima facie evidence for all purposes that the return, statement, or other document was actually signed by him.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 28
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1969–2022 · leading case: United States v. Aurora Trevino, 419 F.3d 896 (9th Cir. 2005).
United States v. Aurora Trevino, 419 F.3d 896 (9th Cir. 2005). “However, 26 U.S.C. § 6064 , the statute upon which Instruction No.”
United States v. Richard Y. Kim & Young N. Kim, 884 F.2d 189 (5th Cir. 1989). “individual’s name is signed to a return, statement, or other document shall be prima facie evidence for all purposes that the return, statement, or other document was actually signed by him.”
United States v. McKee, 506 F.3d 225 (3rd Cir. 2007). “Defendants claim that the jury could not rely on 26 U.S.C. § 6064 , which provides that the fact of a signature on the tax return is prima facie evidence that the return was signed by the named individual.”
United States v. Gerald Rayborn, 491 F.3d 513 (6th Cir. 2007). “” 26 U.S.C. § 6064 (emphasis added). The statute does not refer to the signer’s knowledge of the contents of the return.”
United States v. Samuel C. Cashio, 420 F.2d 1132 (5th Cir. 1970). “26 U.S.C.A. § 6064 . 3 We disagree with Cashio’s contention that the presumption created by statute is confined to civil eases.”
United States v. Victor Parsons, 967 F.2d 452 (10th Cir. 1992). “In addition, a statute, 26 U.S.C. § 6064 , provides that the signature of a person, on a “return, statement, or other document” is prima facie evidence that the person signed the document.”
United States v. Vicente Carrodeguas, Guillermo Hernandez-Cartaya, Francisco J. Fernandez, 747 F.2d 1390 (11th Cir. 1984). “26 U.S.C.A. § 6064 . Fernandez did not offer evidence rebutting this presumption.”
United States v. Archie L. Wainwright, 413 F.2d 796 (10th Cir. 1969). “The jury was told the taxpayer must have a specific intent to evade the tax, that per 26 U.S.C. § 6064 they could accept the return as being signed by the taxpayer unless evidence showed the contrary, that they could believe from his signing of the return that he knew its…”
United States v. Leslie B. Ponder, Jr., 444 F.2d 816 (5th Cir. 1971). “26 U.S.C. § 6064 . The defendant’s secretary, Mrs.”
United States v. Clyde E. Wilson, & Stuart Van Eman, 887 F.2d 69 (5th Cir. 1989). “” 26 U.S.C. § 6064 . Appellants made no effort to rebut this presumption.”
United States v. Martin N. Wolters, 656 F.2d 523 (9th Cir. 1981). “Although these cases construed 26 U.S.C. § 6064 , the same type of a presumption was involved and, by analogy, the decisions in those cases are entitled to great weight in connection with the constitutionality of the presumption in the statute before us.”
United States v. Bushlow, 832 F. Supp. 574 (E.D.N.Y 1993). “See 26 U.S.C. § 6064 (signature on tax return is presumed authentic).”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.