26 U.S.C. § 7421(A)

64 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · browse and sort

• Louie N. Elias v. W.H. Connett
  908 F.2d 521· 9th Cir.· 1990-07-16 ·cited 36×
  The court held that the Anti-Injunction Act barred injunctive relief for tax years 1974-1979 due to proper notice, and for 1981-1982 due to lack of sufficient grounds for equitable relief. The court also held that the plaintiff failed to state a quiet title action under 28 U.S.C.
• Gattuso v. Pecorella
  733 F.2d 709· 9th Cir.· 1984-05-22 ·cited 34×
  The court held that it lacked jurisdiction to hear the taxpayers' challenge to tax assessments and that their claim that wages are not income is frivolous.
• United States v. Coson
  286 F.2d 453· 9th Cir.· 1961-01-23 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the district court had jurisdiction to entertain an action to remove a federal tax lien as a cloud on title, and that the lien was invalid due to the government's failure to provide statutory notice and demand to the plaintiff.
• Bright v. Bechtel Petroleum, Inc.
  780 F.2d 766· 9th Cir.· 1986-01-10 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the employer's removal of the employee's breach of contract claim was proper because the claim, despite being artfully pleaded, actually arose under federal tax law. The court affirmed the dismissal of both federal and state tax withholding claims and the awar
• "Americans United" Inc. v. Walters
  477 F.2d 1169· D.C. Cir.· 1973-01-11 ·cited 28×
  The court did not decide the merits of the case, only that constitutional issues warranted a three-judge court.
• Willits v. Richardson
  497 F.2d 240· 5th Cir.· 1974-07-18 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the action under the tax anti-injunction statute because the IRS's jeopardy assessment was based on insufficient evidence and the plaintiff lacked an adequate remedy at law.
• United States v. Author Servs., Inc.
  804 F.2d 1520· 9th Cir.· 1986-12-01 ·cited 24×
  The court held that a district court did not abuse its discretion in denying an evidentiary hearing and properly enforced an IRS summons with restrictions on disclosure, as the IRS demonstrated a legitimate purpose for the investigation.
• ST. Louis Union Tr. Co. v. United States
  617 F.2d 1293· 8th Cir.· 1980-03-11 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the Escrow Agreement was unambiguous, precluding parol evidence, and that Stone possessed sufficient 'property or rights to property' in the escrowed income to be subject to IRS tax levies.
• Seattle Ass'n OF Credit MEN v. United States
  240 F.2d 906· 9th Cir.· 1957-02-07 ·cited 24×
  The court held that 28 U.S.C. § 2463 confers jurisdiction upon district courts to entertain quiet title actions concerning property detained under federal revenue laws, and that the consent to be sued under 28 U.S.C. § 2410 is not limited to judicial sales.
• In re Becker's Motor Transp., Inc. v. Dep't OF the Treas.
  632 F.2d 242· 3d Cir.· 1980-09-04 ·cited 22×
  The court held that bankruptcy courts lack jurisdiction to enjoin IRS tax collection efforts but can issue declaratory relief. It also held that the IRS is equitably estopped from collecting pre-petition interest due to misleading conduct, but not from collecting pre-petition pen
• Junior Chamber OF Commerce OF Rochester, Inc. v. The United States Jaycees
  495 F.2d 883· 10th Cir.· 1974-04-16 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the United States Jaycees' discriminatory membership policies, despite receiving federal funds and tax exemptions, do not constitute state or federal action sufficient to violate constitutional rights or civil rights statutes.
• Ersa, Inc. v. Dudley
  234 F.2d 178· 3d Cir.· 1956-05-29 ·cited 20×
  The court held that federal tax liens attached to personal property before the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania's lien became choate, making the federal liens prior.
• Capozzoli v. Tracey
  663 F.2d 654· 5th Cir.· 1981-12-11 ·cited 17×
  The court held that claims arising from an IRS agent's actions, even if tortious, are barred by 28 U.S.C. § 2680(c) if they are in any way related to the assessment or collection of taxes.
• Smith v. Roscoe L. Eggar
  655 F.2d 181· 9th Cir.· 1981-08-31 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the district court had jurisdiction and that the Commissioner could not rescind the agreement based on the taxpayer's removal of papers from a bank vault, as the agreement was not ambiguous and the removal did not violate its terms.
• Am. Ass'n OF Commodity Traders v. Dep't OF the Treas.
  598 F.2d 1233· 1st Cir.· 1979-05-31 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the district court correctly dismissed the complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, affirming the dismissal.
• Koch v. Alexander
  561 F.2d 1115· 4th Cir.· 1977-08-16 ·cited 14×
  The filing of an amended tax return showing zero liability does not render the originally assessed tax a 'deficiency' for purposes of enjoining collection under the Anti-Injunction Act.
• Al-Kim, Inc. v. The United States
  650 F.2d 944· 9th Cir.· 1979-10-11 ·cited 13×
  Third parties whose property is levied upon to satisfy another's tax liability cannot contest the merits of the tax assessment under 26 U.S.C. § 6213, but may seek relief under 26 U.S.C. § 7426 if the levy was wrongful.
• United States v. Mellon Bank
  521 F.2d 708· 3d Cir.· 1975-08-28 ·cited 13×
  The court held that the Anti-Injunction Act does not divest the district court of jurisdiction over counterclaims when the court has jurisdiction over an enforcement petition filed by the United States under 26 U.S.C. § 7402.
• Cattle Feeders TAX Comm. v. Hon. George Shultz
  504 F.2d 462· 10th Cir.· 1974-10-04 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the Anti-Injunction Act bars this suit because the government can ultimately prevail and there is no basis for equity jurisdiction.
• Giles E. Bullock and Katherine D. Bullock v. Latham
  306 F.2d 45· 2d Cir.· 1962-07-20 ·cited 12×
  The court held that federal district courts have jurisdiction to hear cases where a non-taxpayer's property is seized to satisfy another's tax liability, even when the Declaratory Judgment Act and anti-injunction statutes might otherwise apply.
• Hughes v. United States
  953 F.2d 531· 9th Cir.· 1992-01-09 ·cited 11×
  The court held that the district court properly dismissed claims for injunctive and declaratory relief due to lack of subject matter jurisdiction under the Anti-Injunction Act and Declaratory Judgment Act, and properly granted summary judgment on damages claims.
• Bauer v. Foley
  404 F.2d 1215· 2d Cir.· 1968-12-18 ·cited 11×
  A joint notice of deficiency is only effective if a genuine joint return was filed; forgery or duress invalidates the return and may allow for equitable relief despite statutory bars.
• Singleton v. Mathis
  284 F.2d 616· 8th Cir.· 1960-12-27 ·cited 11×
  The court held that the actions could not be maintained because the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate the extraordinary circumstances required to overcome the statutory prohibition against enjoining tax collection.
• Lowrie v. United States
  824 F.2d 827· 10th Cir.· 1987-07-28 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the Anti-Injunction Act barred the suit against the IRS for return of records when the purpose was to avoid tax liability, and reversed the judgment against the FBI as they no longer possessed the records.
• Hansen v. United States
  744 F.2d 658· 8th Cir.· 1984-09-28 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court correctly dismissed the action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction under the Anti-Injunction Act, as the appellants failed to meet the criteria for a judicial exception.
• White v. Boyle
  538 F.2d 1077· 4th Cir.· 1976-08-10 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to present specific facts demonstrating a genuine issue of material fact regarding the IRS agents' actions and motivations, and that the agents were protected by official immunity.
• Laing v. United States
  496 F.2d 853· 2d Cir.· 1974-05-02 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court properly dismissed the complaint seeking an injunction and declaratory judgment regarding federal tax assessment and levy.
• Guthrie v. K.J. Sawyer
  970 F.2d 733· 10th Cir.· 1992-07-21 ·cited 8×
  A taxpayer may obtain injunctive relief under I.R.C. § 6213(a) for failure to receive a deficiency notice, and procedural violations in assessment or levy are cognizable in a quiet title action under 28 U.S.C. § 2410. Summary judgment against taxpayers who failed to provide an af
• Stites v. United States Gov't
  746 F.2d 1085· 5th Cir.· 1984-11-19 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the Anti-Injunction Act barred the suit and that the taxpayers' claims were frivolous, warranting double costs on appeal.
• Maxfield v. United States Postal Serv.
  752 F.2d 433· 9th Cir.· 1984-10-26 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the Anti-Injunction Act barred the taxpayer's suit against his employer for wrongful tax withholding, and the employer is immune from liability for following IRS directives.
• Souther v. G.L. Mihlbachler
  701 F.2d 131· 10th Cir.· 1983-03-02 ·cited 8×
  Federal district courts lack jurisdiction to enjoin the collection of taxes or penalties, and the petitioner failed to meet the stringent requirements for an exception.
• Smith v. Cora Rich and Commissioner of Internal Revenue
  667 F.2d 1228· 5th Cir.· 1982-02-18 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the Anti-Injunction Act bars suits seeking to restrain the assessment or collection of taxes, and the plaintiffs' claims did not fall within any statutory exceptions.
• Morgan L. McCABE v. Alexander
  526 F.2d 963· 5th Cir.· 1976-02-06 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the Anti-Injunction Act and Declaratory Judgment Act bar suits seeking to restrain the assessment or collection of federal taxes, and the plaintiff failed to meet the exception requiring the government to be unable to prevail on the merits.
• Lucia v. United States
  447 F.2d 912· 5th Cir.· 1971-08-23 ·cited 8×
• Botta v. Scanlon
  288 F.2d 504· 2d Cir.· 1961-03-06 ·cited 8×
  The court held that individuals not specified in the taxing statutes as liable for a tax, especially a penalty for willful acts, should have an opportunity for judicial review before their property is seized.
• Roat v. Comm'r, Internal Revenue Serv.
  847 F.2d 1379· 9th Cir.· 1988-05-27 ·cited 7×
  The court held that the Commissioner is not required to prepare a tax return on behalf of a taxpayer before issuing a valid notice of deficiency, and that the Anti-Injunction Act bars suits seeking to restrain tax collection when adequate legal remedies exist.
• Algonquin SNG, Inc. v. Fed. Energy Admin.
  518 F.2d 1051· D.C. Cir.· 1975-08-11 ·cited 7×
  The court held that 19 U.S.C. § 1862(b) does not grant the President the substantive authority to impose license fees of the magnitude at issue, as it is limited to direct import controls.
• Dickens v. United States
  671 F.2d 969· 6th Cir.· 1982-03-01 ·cited 6×
  The Anti-Injunction Act and Declaratory Judgment Act bar federal courts from enjoining the IRS from using information obtained from a court-ordered wiretap and search warrant for tax assessment purposes.
• Kent v. The N. Cal. Reg'l Off. OF the Am. Friends Serv. Comm.
  497 F.2d 1325· 9th Cir.· 1974-05-10 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court properly dismissed the interpleader and injunctive relief actions because the trustees lacked standing and the interpleader statute's requirements were not met.
• Trent v. United States
  442 F.2d 405· 6th Cir.· 1971-05-03 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the statutory prohibition against enjoining tax collection applies, and the narrow exception does not apply because the government could ultimately prevail.
• Linn v. Chivatero
  790 F.2d 1270· 5th Cir.· 1986-06-06 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the appellant is entitled to attorney's fees and costs under the Equal Access to Justice Act because the government's position was not substantially justified, and the amended Act applies.
• Marvel v. United States
  548 F.2d 295· 10th Cir.· 1977-01-13 ·cited 4×
  The Anti-Injunction Act bars injunctive relief to prevent IRS asset seizure during a tax refund suit, even if seizure would cause irreparable harm, unless the government cannot possibly prevail on the merits.
• Jacobson v. The Organized Crime & Racketeering Section OF the United States Dep't OF Just.
  544 F.2d 637· 2d Cir.· 1976-11-03 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Anti-Injunction Act barred the suit for a preliminary injunction and that the damage claims were legally insufficient.
• James v. United States
  542 F.2d 16· 6th Cir.· 1976-09-09 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the taxpayer failed to satisfy the prerequisites for enjoining tax collection under the Williams Packing and Shapiro tests, and thus the District Court correctly denied injunctive relief.
• Balistrieri v. United States
  303 F.2d 617· 7th Cir.· 1962-05-16 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a district court correctly dismissed a suit seeking a declaratory judgment to examine records sought by the IRS, as such suits are generally barred by statute and courts should not interfere prematurely in administrative proceedings.
• Modzelewski v. Dugan
  627 F. Supp. 141· S.D. Fla.· 1985-08-27 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the complaint must be dismissed for failure to state a claim and lack of subject matter jurisdiction because the plaintiff had not paid the disputed tax assessment and penalty in full, and had not alleged the IRS agent acted outside the scope of his employment
• Kaestner v. Schmidt
  473 F.2d 1294· 9th Cir.· 1973-02-13 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court correctly determined it lacked jurisdiction to hear the estoppel claim because material issues of fact were disputed, meaning the government could potentially prevail.
• Botsford v. Riddell
  283 F.2d 298· 9th Cir.· 1960-10-13 ·cited 2×
  The district court properly dismissed the action against the Director for lack of jurisdiction.
• Grant v. United States
  289 F. Supp. 2d 1361· S.D. Fla.· 2003-07-03 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the IRS's termination of the installment agreement and levying of social security benefits may constitute unauthorized collection actions, but claims related to the filing of a prior tax case, specific performance, and return of levied property are dismissed.
• United States v. Driscoll's Towing Serv.
  51 B.R. 990· S.D. Fla.· 1985-07-24 ·cited 1×
  The court held that a bankrupt corporation lacks standing to challenge the personal tax liability of its principals under 26 U.S.C. § 6672, and that the Anti-Injunction Act prohibits enjoining the assessment or collection of taxes.