U.S. Tax Court· 7/3/1991
Jones v. Commissioner
Citations
- 97 T.C. 7
- 1991 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 59
- 97 T.C. No. 2
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- declining to extend Tweel in the civil context to suppress evidence
- “The purpose of a proceeding before * * * [the Tax Court] is to determine a taxpayer’s correct tax liability”
- \a trial before this Court is a proceeding de novo; hence our determination of a taxpayer's liability must be based on the merits of the case and not on any previous record developed at the administrative level\
- “a trial before this Court is a proceeding de novo; hence our determination of a taxpayer’s liability must be based on the merits of the case and not on any previous record developed at the administrative level”
- “a trial before this Court is a proceeding de novo; hence our determination of a taxpayer’s liability must be based on the merits of the case and not on any previous record developed at the administrative level”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Gerber, Nims, Jacobs, Parker, Beghe, Korner, Swift, Cohen, Halpern, Shields, Wright, Only, Ruwe, Parr, Colvin, Hamblen, Chabot, Clapp, Agree, Whalen
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
8 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Wilson v. CommissionerNinth Circuit· 2013-01-15· cited 54×
- Commissioner v. NealEleventh Circuit· 2009-02-10· cited 37×
- John E. Shimota and Nan B. Shimota v. The United StatesFederal Circuit· 1991-11-20· cited 23×
- Utilicorp United v. CommissionerU.S. Tax Court· 1995-06-07· cited 2×
- Anthony Dijohn Gerri Dijohn v. Commissioner Internal Revenue ServiceNinth Circuit· 1993-08-20
- Shimota v. United StatesFederal Circuit· 1991-09-12
- United States v. BaisdenE.D. California· 2012-07-20
- Alberto Garcia, Jr.U.S. Tax Court· 2025-05-19
Cites
27 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- United States v. LeonSupreme Court· 1984-09-18· cited 9,230×
- Mapp v. OhioSupreme Court· 1961-10-09· cited 9,088×
- Franks v. DelawareSupreme Court· 1978-06-26· cited 8,679×
- United States v. CalandraSupreme Court· 1974-01-08· cited 3,415×
- Nix v. WilliamsSupreme Court· 1984-06-11· cited 3,080×
- United States v. JanisSupreme Court· 1976-10-04· cited 1,453×
- Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Lopez-MendozaSupreme Court· 1984-07-05· cited 1,184×
- United States v. CaceresSupreme Court· 1979-04-13· cited 883×
- United States v. PaynerSupreme Court· 1980-08-11· cited 785×
- Jackson v. CommissionerU.S. Tax Court· 1979-11-28· cited 229×
- United States v. Nicholas J. TweelFifth Circuit· 1977-04-08· cited 136×
- United States v. Horton R. PruddenFifth Circuit· 1970-06-26· cited 128×
- United States v. Joseph L. SclafaniSecond Circuit· 1959-06-22· cited 88×
- Vallone v. CommissionerU.S. Tax Court· 1987-04-06· cited 86×
- Human Engineering Institute v. CommissionerU.S. Tax Court· 1973-10-18· cited 73×
- United States v. Sheldon SerlinSeventh Circuit· 1983-06-24· cited 72×
- Graham v. CommissionerU.S. Tax Court· 1984-02-27· cited 44×
- Guzzetta v. CommissionerU.S. Tax Court· 1982-02-02· cited 42×
- United States v. Frank A. JaskiewiczThird Circuit· 1970-09-28· cited 39×
- United States v. BlankN.D. Ohio· 1966-06-29· cited 39×
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.