In Re Smith’s Empirical Analysis
1990
Citation profile
Relationships
Applies 26 U.S.C. § 401 (Self-Employed Individuals Tax Retirement Act of 1962) · 26 U.S.C. § 408 (§ 2002 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974)
Relies on United States v. Locke · United States v. Public Utilities Commission · Norwest Bank Nebraska, N.A. v. Tveten · Lindberg Armstrong v. A Lindberg · Edwards v. Valdez
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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The federal case law as well as the North Dakota Supreme Court hold that in divining the purpose or intent of a statute, court's [sic] must resort in the first instance to the language of the statute itself. . . . The language of the statute itself is regarded as conclusive of legislative intent unless the statute is clearly ambiguous or creates an irrational result. Legislative history . . . cannot be used to create the ambiguity or the irrational result.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Kukowski v. Wagner“The dollar limit does not apply to the extent this property is reasonably necessary for the support of the resident and that resident's dependents. . . .”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Kukowski v. Wagner“When the wording of a statute is clear and free of all ambiguity, the letter of it is not to be disregarded under the pretext of pursuing its spirit.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Kukowski v. Wagner
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.