Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 120 F.2d 1 - Keystone Mining Co. v. Gray

Keystone Mining Co. v. Gray’s Empirical Analysis

120 F.2d 1 · 1941

Citation profile

12
cited by 12 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
2
states following
March 1971
most recently cited

7 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 12 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 1971

7 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

601941195019601970decided

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

Applies 15 U.S.C. § 20 (Sherman Antitrust Act) · 15 U.S.C. § 828

Relies on Sunshine Anthracite Coal Co. v. Adkins · United States ex rel. Attorney General of the United States v. Delaware & Hudson Co. · Pennsylvania Railroad Company v. International Coal Mining Company · United Shoe Machinery Corporation v. United States · Hart Steel Company v. Railroad Supply Company

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

  1. ““The term ‘disposal’ as used in this section includes consumption or use (whether in the production of coke or fuel, or otherwise) by a producer, and any transfer of title by the producer other than by sale. “(b) In addition to the tax imposed by subsection (a) of this section, there is hereby imposed upon the sale or other disposal of bituminous coal produced within the United States, when sold or otherwise disposed of by the producer thereof, which would be subject to the application of the conditions and provisions of the code provided for in section 4, or of the provisions of section 4-A, an excise tax in an amount equal to 19% per centum of the sale price at the mine in the case of coal disposed of by sale at the mine, or in the case of coal disposed of otherwise than by sale at the mine, and coal sold otherwise than through an arms’ length transaction, 19% per centum of the fair market value of such coal at the time of such disposal or sale. In the case of any producer who is a code member as provided in section 4 and is so certified to the Commissioner of Internal Revenue by the Commission, the sale or disposal by such producer during the continuance of his membership in the code of coal produced by him shall be exempt from the tax imposed by this subsection. “Sec. 4. The provisions of this section shall be promulgated by the Commission as the ‘Bituminous Coal Code’, and are herein referred to as the code. “Producers accepting membership in the code as provided in sect”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Sec. 6. (b) Any person aggrieved by an order issued by the Commission in a proceeding to which such person is a party may obtain a review of such order in the Circuit Court of Appeals of the United States, within any circuit wherein such person resides or has his principal place of business, or in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, by filing in such court, within sixty days after the entry of such order, a written petition praying that the order of the Commission be modified or set aside in whole or in part. A copy of such petition shall be forthwith served upon any member of the Commission and thereupon the Commission shall certify and file in the court a transcript of the record upon which the order complained of was entered. Upon the filing of such transcript such court shall have exclusive jurisdiction to affirm, modify, and enforce or set aside such order, in whole or in part. No objection to the order of the Commission shall be considered by the court unless such objection shall have been urged below. The finding of the Commission as to the facts, if supported by substantial evidence, shall be conclusive, . . , “Sec. 17. As used in this Act— “(c) The term 'producer’ includes all individuals, firms, associations, corporations, trustees, and receivers engaged in the business of mining coal.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““It is proposed, on page 30, line 17, to strike out the period after the word 'him’, and to insert a comma and the words 'and for the purpose of this subsection the term 'producer’ also includes all individuals, partnerships, and corporations which are found by the Commission, upon the effective date of this act, bona fide and not for the purpose of evading the provisions of this act, to be owned by, or to be under common ownership with, a producer, provided such a producer does not sell any part of his production on the commercial market.’ . . . The purpose of the amendment is simply to extend the exception carried by subsection (1), on page 30, so as to include under the definition of the word 'producer’ a wholly owned subsidiary or other legal entity having identical ownership. That is the whole purpose. “The question is on agreeing to the amendment offered by the Senator from Ohio. “The amendment was agreed to.””
    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.