Calloway v. Commissioner’s Empirical Analysis
2010
Citation profile
2 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 26 U.S.C. § 6700 · 31 U.S.C. § 3124
Relies on Gregory v. Helvering · United States v. Boyle · Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Court Holding Co · HIGBEE v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE · Freytag 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 34 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) Whether legal title passes; (2) how the parties treat the transaction; (3) whether an equity interest in the property is acquired; (4) whether the contract creates a present obligation on the seller to execute and deliver a deed and a present obligation on the purchaser to make payments; (5) whether the right of possession is vested in the purchaser; (6) which party pays the property taxes; (7) which party bears the risk of loss or damage to the property; and (8) which party receives the profits from the operation and sale of the property.[ 29 ]”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“This Agreement is made for,the purpose of engaging [Derivium] to provide or arrange finaneing(s) and to provide custodial services to the Client, with respect to certain properties and assets (“Properties”) to be pledged as security, the details of which financing and Properties are to be set out in loan term sheets and attached hereto as Schedule(s) A... .[ 4 ]”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“Calloway and Derivium agreed to what Calloway claims was a nonrecourse loan secured by his stock. In exchange for money, Calloway transferred control of the stock to Derivium. Derivium sold the stock on the open market. The tax rules would seem to be easy to apply. Section 1.1001-2(a)(4)(i), Income Tax Regs., provides that “the sale ... of property that secures a nonrecourse liability discharges the transferor from the liability.” Commissioner v. Tufts, 461 U.S. 300 , 308-09, 103 S.Ct. 1826 , 75 L.Ed.2d 863 (1983), and Crane v. Commissioner, 331 U.S. 1 , 12-13, 67 S.Ct. 1047 , 91 L.Ed. 1301 (1947), teach that the amount realized includes any nonrecourse liability secured by the property sold. Calloway would then have to rec ognize the difference between the discharged debt (i.e., the amount of the loan proceeds plus one day’s accrued interest minus his basis in the stock).[ 49 ]”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
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.