Falk v. Commissioner’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

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

1. “In Commissioner v. Flowers, 326 U.S. 465 , it was ruled that an expense of this character to be deductible must be incident to and required by the employment. In the present case, it can not be argued that the petitioner's expenses in Washington were required by his business carried on in Pittsburgh and Schellsburg, Pennsylvania. Nor did petitioner's employment in Washington by the Government require him to maintain his home in Pittsburgh. For the purposes of his Government employment, his place of business was Washington, D.C. The case of Ney v. United States, 77 Fed. Supp. 1005 , affd., 171 Fed. (2d) 449 , certiorari denied, 336 U.S. 967 , appears to have arisen upon substantially identical facts to those here involved. There the taxpayer was denied the deduction of expenses for hotel rooms and board in Washington during performance of services for the Government in one of the war agencies. He had large business interests in Arkansas and, during the term of his Government employment, continued to maintain his residence in that state to which he made trips at intervals to attend to his personal business affairs. Relief was also denied under substantially similar circumstances in the case of S. M. R. O'Hara, 6 T.C. 841 . See also Robert F. Green, 12 T.C. 656 . Respondent is sustained in his disallowance of the deductions taken.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Magnuson v. Commissioner