United States v. Robert W. Ritchie, Personally and in His Capacity as a Partner/officer of Ritchie, Fels & Dillard, P.C.

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that failure to provide procedural protections was harmless error
• finding that an IRS affidavit, with language identical to the one filed in this case, was not credible
• explaining that facial attacks challenge the sufficiency of the pleading itself
• same; “there is no reason to grant law firms a potential monopoly on money laundering simply because their services are personal and confidential.”
• nonprejudicial errors in administrative procedures mandated by Internal Revenue Code 7609(f) concerning IRS’s “John Doe” summonses not fatal to the summons
• “Where the court takes evidence for a limited purpose of ruling on jurisdiction, the preclusive effect of such findings is limited to the issue decided.

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).