Gillespie v. Commissioner’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

9 federal appellate · 2 district · 4 state decisions

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

1. ““The doctrine does not apply when the judgment pleaded as an estoppel is based upon controlling state decisions subsequently repudiated by supervening decisions, thereby necessitating, re-ex amination and application of state law to the Federal question. Blair v. Commissioner, 300 U.S. 5 , 57 S.Ct. 330 , 81 L.Ed. 465 . Or where authoritative decisions of the Federal courts repudiate the judgment pleaded as an estoppel, thereby having the effect of perpetuating acknowledged error. Henricksen v. Seward [9 Cir., 135 F.2d 986 ] supra. But see Commissioner [of Internal Revenue] v. Western Union Telegraph Co. [2 Cir., 141 F.2d 774 ], supra. It is rightly said that the doctrine should be sparingly applied in tax cases involving liability for different years, and generally it is not applied where the taxable events and transactions are by their nature fluid and subject to change from year to year.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Plantation Pipe Line Company

2. “where the taxable events and transactions are by their nature fluid and subject to change from year to year.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Miller Brewing Co. v. Indiana Department of State Revenue