Ramirez v. United States

How courts have described this case

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

• “both interpretations specifically adhere to the ‘tacking’ principle * * * where under either the extension agreement or section 6503(a)(1

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

9 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Meridian Wood Products Co., Inc., a Corporation v. United States of America, Harry F. Lenton and Colleen Lenton v. United States
  Ninth Circuit· 1984-02-13· cited 87×
• McClamma v. Commissioner
  U.S. Tax Court· 1981-05-12· cited 40×
• Ripley v. Commissioner
  Fourth Circuit· 1996-12-18· cited 11×
• Aufleger v. Commissioner
  U.S. Tax Court· 1992-07-23· cited 10×
• United States v. Wodtke
  N.D. Iowa· 1985-12-26· cited 7×
• Lansburgh v. United States
  S.D. Florida· 1988-08-26· cited 5×
• Pesko v. United States
  Court of Claims· 1990-03-09· cited 4×
• Depasture v. United States (In Re Depasture)
  M.D. Georgia· 2009-11-09· cited 1×
• United States v. Anderson
  N.D. Indiana· 2001-07-05

Cites

3 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Olds & Whipple, Inc. v. United States
  Court of Claims· 1938-04-04· cited 28×
• Continental Oil Co. v. United States
  Court of Claims· 1936-05-04· cited 13×
• Hoosac Mills Corp. v. Commissioner
  First Circuit· 1935-01-31· cited 11×