Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 1 BTA 477 - Rodenbough v. Commissioner

Rodenbough v. Commissioner’s Empirical Analysis

1925

Citation profile

20
cited by 20 later decisions
1
states following
April 1964
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently April 1964

1 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions

14019251930194019501960decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Relies on Knowlton v. Moore · New York Trust Co. v. Eisner · United States v. Ninety-nine Diamonds

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “An amount equal to the value at the time of the decedent’s death of any property, real, personal, or mixed, which can be identified as having been received by the decedent as a share in the estate of any person who died within five years prior to the death of the decedent, or which can be identified as having been acquired by the decedent in exchange for property so received, if an estate tax under the Bevenue Act of 1917 or under this Act was collected from such estate, and if such property is included in the decedent’s gross estate.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “This argument leads to the necessity of earmarking the funds, else there can be no way of showing they were identical. We do not think the statute goes to the length of such a requirement.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.