Berry v. Kavanagh’s Empirical Analysis
137 F.2d 574 · 1943
Citation profile
2 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently June 2017
2 district · 3 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.
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[i]f Congress had intended to levy a tax on every transfer of title it could have expressed its purpose in a sentence, but it is clear from the language of the section that it intended to confine the tax to actual sales”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“‘ ‘ The provisions of the instruments are consistent with the existence of the relationship of principal and agent, but are inconsistent with the relationship of vendor and vendee.” Berry v. Kavanagh, 137 F. 2d 574, 576 .”
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.