Vim Securities Corp. v. Commissioner’s Empirical Analysis
130 F.2d 106 · 1942
Citation profile
8 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently July 1989
8 federal appellate · 1 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 Welch v. Helvering · Higgins v. Smith · United States v. Brager Building & Land Corp.
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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(f) Involuntary Conversión. — If property (as a result of its destruction in whole or in part, theft, seizure, or requisition or condemnation or threat or imminence thereof) is compulsorily or involuntarily converted— [[Image here]] (3) Conversion into money where disposition occurred after i960. — Into money or into property not similar or related in service or use to the converted property, and the disposition of the converted property (as defined in paragraph (2),) occurred after December 31, 1950, the gain (if any) shall be recognized except to the extent hereinafter provided in this paragraph : (A) Nonrecognition of Gain.; — If the taxpayer during the period specified in sub-paragraph (B), for the purpose of replacing the property so converted, purchases other property similar or related in service or use to the property so converted, or purchases stock in the acquisition of control of a corporation owning such other property, at the election of the taxpayer the gain shall be recognized only to the extent that the amount realized upon such conversion (regardless of whether such amount is received in one or more taxable years) exceeds the cost of such other property or such stock. Such election shall be made at such time and in such manner as the Secretary may by regulations prescribe. For the purposes of this paragraph— (i) no property or stock acquired before the disposition of the converted property shall be considered to have been acquired for the purpose of replacing”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““While it received payment of the award on October 9, 1936, it did not until January 29, 1937, begin to make payments which by any theory could be regarded as derived from the proceeds of 16 Concord Street, and it distributed the payments over a period of five months instead of making them at once. In the meantime, so far as appears, it retained the proceeds of the award and may for all that we can know have used them for general business purposes. It certainly did not comply with the Regulation providing that a taxpayer who seeks to come within the exception of Section 112 (f) ‘must trace the proceeds of the award into the payments for the property so purchased’ and ‘must be able to prove that the proceeds were actually invested in such other property similar or related in use to the property condemned.’ Treasury Regulations 94, Art. 112(f)-1.” [Italics ours.]”
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.