Penn v. Robertson’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

12 federal appellate · 4 district ·

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 34 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““There are some principles of income tax accounting applicable to this case now well settled by decisions. In general the income tax law is concerned only with realized gains and losses, Lucas v. American Code Co., 280 U.S. 445, 449 , 50 S.Ct. 202 , 74 L.Ed. 538 , 67 A.L.R. 1010 ; and where, as in this case, the taxpayer’s accounts are kept on a cash basis and not on an accrual basis, he receives taxable income only when it actually comes into his possession or, if only constructively received, when the amount is definitely ascertained and subject to his unrestricted control. North American Oil Consolidated v. Burnet, 286 U.S. 417 , 52 S.Ct. 613 , 76 L.Ed. 1197 ; Lynchburg Trust & Savings Bank v. Commissioner, 4 Cir., 68 F.2d 356 , certiorari denied 292 U.S. 640 , 54 S.Ct. 773 , 78 L.Ed. 1492 . But in view of practical necessities, income tax accounting with the Government must be on an annual basis, Burnet v. Sanford & Brooks Co., 282 U.S. 359 , 51 S.Ct. 150 , 75 L.Ed. 383 ; Heiner v. Mellon, 304 U.S. 271 , 58 S.Ct. 926 , 82 L.Ed. 1337 ; and, therefore, moneys received by a taxpayer as his own under a claim of right and without restriction as to their disposition are taxable for the year in which they are received and retained even though in a later year the taxpayer is obliged to refund them in whole or in part, in which event he would have a claim for deduction in the later year. Burnet v. Sanford & Brooks Co., supra; - Brown v. Helvering, 291 U.S. 193 , 54 S.Ct. 356 , 78 ”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Anderson v. Bowers

2. “If a taxpayer receives earnings under a claim of right and without restriction as to its disposition, he has received income which he is required to return, even though it may still be claimed that he is not entitled to retain the money, and even though he may still be adjudged liable to restore its equivalent.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 73 F. Supp. 973 - Gargaro v. United States

3. “[T]he rescission in 1931 before the close of the calendar year * * * extinguished what otherwise would have been taxable income to * * * [the taxpayer] for that year.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Blagaich v. Comm'r