Mayberry v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
151 F.3d 855 · 1998
Citation profile
20 federal appellate · 2 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 42 later decisions — most recently March 2016 · most notably Silva v. Metropolitan Life Insurance (2014), Gerbec v. United States (1999)
20 federal appellate · 2 district · 2 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
Applies 26 U.S.C. § 104 · 26 U.S.C. § 3101 (Federal Insurance Contributions Act) · 26 U.S.C. § 3121 (Federal Insurance Contributions Act) · 26 U.S.C. § 61 (Payment-in-Kind Tax Treatment Act of 1983) · 29 U.S.C. § 1132 (§ 502 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974)
Relies on Bousley v. United States · Ingersoll-Rand Co. v. McClendon · Mertens v. Hewitt Associates · Harper v. Virginia Department of Taxation · James B. Beam Distilling Co. v. Georgia
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 42 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“), were wages for FICA tax purposes. The Mayberry panel reasoned: The Mayberrys argue that since class members were compensated in full for all services rendered to Continental Can, no portion of the settlement award can be treated as remuneration for”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“the amount of any damages (other than punitive damages) received (whether by suit or agreement and whether as lump sums or as periodic payments) on account of personal physical injuries or physical sickness.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“record the parties created in order to determine the tax character of a recovery.”
2 later decisions 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.