Skip to main content
· 7/23/2013

Carol Gray v. United States

Citations

  • 723 F.3d 795
  • 2013 WL 3796243
  • 112 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 5330
  • 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 14873

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • holding that the exhaustion requirement under 26 U.S.C. § 7433(d) is a prerequisite to filing a refund suit in district court
  • describing exhaustion as “a condition on the government’s waiver of sovereign immunity” and as an “affirmative defense”
  • describing exhaustion as “a condition on the government’s waiver of sovereign immunity” and as an “affirmative defense”
  • discussing the difference between exhaustion requirements that are jurisdictional and those that are not
  • affirming legality of regulations requiring exhaustion before plaintiff can file suit
  • “Although a plaintiff must exhaust administrative remedies to recover damages under § 7433, exhaustion is not a jurisdictional requirement.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Flaum, Wood, Hamilton

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.