§Why CasetextPricing

Dmb Realco Llc et al v. United States of America

MOTION for Summary Judgment

32 Cited authorities

  1. United States v. Nordic Village, Inc.

    503 U.S. 30 (1992)   Cited 1,808 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the existence of "plausible" interpretations that would not permit recovery "is enough to establish that a reading imposing monetary liability on the Government is not ‘unambiguous' and therefore should not be adopted"

  2. Erie R. Co. v. Tompkins

    304 U.S. 64 (1938)   Cited 20,666 times   18 Legal Analyses
    Holding that state law governs substantive issues and federal law governs procedural issues

  3. United States v. Craft

    535 U.S. 274 (2002)   Cited 502 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a federal tax lien may attach to tenancy by the entireties property to satisfy the tax obligation of one tenant

  4. Miller v. Gammie

    335 F.3d 889 (9th Cir. 2003)   Cited 1,665 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Holding that circuit precedent remains binding unless it is "clearly irreconcilable" with an intervening Supreme Court decision

  5. Commissioner v. Estate of Bosch

    387 U.S. 456 (1967)   Cited 1,467 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that “federal authorities are not bound” by state-court determination of facts affecting federal tax liabilities if the United States was not a party to the state proceedings

  6. United States v. Security Trust & Savings Bank

    340 U.S. 47 (1950)   Cited 388 times
    Holding that a property right that comes into existence by court action, such as a judgment lien, does not relate back to some earlier date to destroy the priority of a federal tax lien

  7. Estate of Sanford v. Comm'r

    308 U.S. 39 (1939)   Cited 358 times
    Holding that a court is not bound to accept as controlling stipulations as to questions of law

  8. U.S. v. Boulware

    384 F.3d 794 (9th Cir. 2004)   Cited 139 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding a "state court judgment was admissible . . . as a document that affected an interest in property."

  9. United States v. Irvine

    511 U.S. 224 (1994)   Cited 54 times
    Holding federal tax law is not "struck blind" by state law right to inheritance disclaimer where Congress has shown no intent to support state law legal fictions as touchstones of taxability

  10. United States v. Pelzer

    312 U.S. 399 (1941)   Cited 195 times
    In United States v. Pelzer, 312 U.S. 399, 403, 61 S.Ct. 659, 661, 85 L.Ed. 913, the present Chief Justice, in construing Sec. 504(b) of the Revenue Act of 1932, said that the phrase "future interests" was plainly not concerned with varying local definitions of property interests or local refinements of conveyancing and that the "purpose which marks the boundaries of the statutory command" was "the protection of the revenue and the appropriate administration of the tax immunity provided by the statute."

  11. Rule 56 - Summary Judgment

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 56   Cited 334,280 times   159 Legal Analyses
    Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit

  12. Section 170 - Charitable, etc., contributions and gifts

    26 U.S.C. § 170   Cited 1,322 times   100 Legal Analyses
    In § 170 and § 501(c)(3), Congress has identified categories of traditionally exempt institutions and has specified certain additional requirements for tax exemption.

  13. Section 6226 - Alternative to payment of imputed underpayment by partnership

    26 U.S.C. § 6226   Cited 522 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Granting a reviewing court in a TEFRA proceeding jurisdiction to "determine * * * the applicability of any penalty, addition to tax, or additional amount which relates to an adjustment to a partnership item"

  14. Section 701 - Partners, not partnership, subject to tax

    26 U.S.C. § 701   Cited 343 times   21 Legal Analyses
    Providing that partners, not partnerships, are liable for income tax

  15. Section 702 - Income and credits of partner

    26 U.S.C. § 702   Cited 256 times   33 Legal Analyses

    (a) General rule In determining his income tax, each partner shall take into account separately his distributive share of the partnership's- (1) gains and losses from sales or exchanges of capital assets held for not more than 1 year, (2) gains and losses from sales or exchanges of capital assets held for more than 1 year, (3) gains and losses from sales or exchanges of property described in section 1231 (relating to certain property used in a trade or business and involuntary conversions), (4) charitable

  16. Section 673 - Reversionary interests

    26 U.S.C. § 673   Cited 35 times   3 Legal Analyses

    (a) General rule The grantor shall be treated as the owner of any portion of a trust in which he has a reversionary interest in either the corpus or the income therefrom, if, as of the inception of that portion of the trust, the value of such interest exceeds 5 percent of the value of such portion. (b) Reversionary interest taking effect at death of minor lineal descendant beneficiary In the case of any beneficiary who- (1) is a lineal descendant of the grantor, and (2) holds all of the present interests

  17. Section 38-511 - Cancellation of political subdivision and state contracts; definition

    Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 38-511

    A. The state, its political subdivisions or any department or agency of either may, within three years after its execution, cancel any contract, without penalty or further obligation, made by the state, its political subdivisions, or any of the departments or agencies of either if any person significantly involved in initiating, negotiating, securing, drafting or creating the contract on behalf of the state, its political subdivisions or any of the departments or agencies of either is, at any time