United States v. Rindskopf’s Empirical Analysis
105 U.S. 418 · 1881
Citation profile
114 federal appellate · 23 district · 5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 263 later decisions (17 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2005 · most notably Helvering v. Taylor (1935), Lewis v. United States (1892)
114 federal appellate · 23 district · 5 state decisions
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 Lincoln v. Claflin
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 263 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The assessment of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue was only prima facie evidence of the amount due as taxes upon the spirits distilled between the dates mentioned. It established a prima facie case of liability against the distiller, and nothing more. If not impeached, it was sufficient to justify a recovery; but every material fact upon which his liability was asserted, was open to contestation. He and his sureties were at liberty to show that no spirits, or a less quantity than that stated by the commissioner, were distilled within the period mentioned, and thus entirely,- or in part, overthrow the assessment. They were also at liberty to show a payment of the tax assessed, in whole or in part, and thus discharge or reduce the distiller's liability. To the extent, however, in which the assessment was not impaired, it was evidence of the amount due.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“And upon it being so made to appear, the burden of proof then shifts to the plaintiffs, and it then becomes incumbent on the plaintiffs, to maintain and establish the correctness of the assessment by sufficient and competent evidence. * * The order of proof which has been maintained upon the trial is in consonance with the rules of law applicable to such a case, which have just been stated.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“erred in instructing the jury that the assessment was to be taken and considered in its entirety, and that the government was entitled to recover the exact amount assessed, or not any sum.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.