Reisman v. Caplin

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a pre-enforcement challenge to a non-self-executing Internal Revenue Service summons was “subject to dismissal for want of equity”
• holding that taxpayer who is the target but not the recipient of an administrative subpoena pursuant to 26 U.S.C. § 7602 may challenge the subpoena
• holding that orders enforcing internal revenue summonses are appeal-able
• denying injunctive relief from IRS summonses because § 7604(b) “provides full opportunity for judicial review before any coercive sanctions may be imposed”
• dismissing taxpayers’ challenge to third-party subpoenas issued by the Internal Revenue Service, holding that taxpayers had adequate remedies at law which included intervention in any eventual enforcement proceeding
• requesting witness to object to production within ten days of service of subpoena

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).