Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 123 F.2d 597 - Young v. Commissioner

Young v. Commissioner’s Empirical Analysis

123 F.2d 597 · 1941

Citation profile

25
cited by 25 later decisions
September 2013
most recently cited

13 federal appellate · 2 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently September 2013 · most notably Duval v. United States (1984), Boehm v. Commissioner (1945)

13 federal appellate · 2 district ·

8019411950196019701980199020002010decided

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 United States v. S S White Dental Mfg Co of Pennsylvania · Schmidlapp v. Commissioner · De Loss v. Commissioner · Mahler v. Commissioner · Keeney v. Commissioner

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

  1. “In cases like this the taxpayer is at times in a very difficult position in determining in what year to claim a loss. The only safe practice, we think, is to claim a loss for the earliest year when it may possibly be allowed and to renew the claim in subsequent years if there is any reasonable chance of its being applicable to the income for those years.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““We think the Board and the Commissioner would have been fully justified in finding that the stock became worthless in 1932. Such a trifling realization as $60 which the taxpayer apparently might have obtained as the result of the negotiations in 1936 represented nothing more than nuisance value. * * * “Whether 1932 or 1936 be taken as the time when the stock became worthless, in each year there was an identifiable event— in the first bankruptcy, and in the second the expiration of the option in Imco.” 123 F.2d 600 .'”
    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.