Evans v. Commissioner’s Empirical Analysis
1952
Citation profile
12 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently April 1977 · most notably Honolulu Oil Corp. v. Halliburton (1939), La Fortune v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue (1958)
12 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 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
Relies on United States v. Pelzer · Fisher v. Commissioner · Sensenbrenner v. Commissioner · Kniep 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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““(b) Exclusions from gifts” ****** “(3) Gifts after 1942. In the case of gifts (other than gifts of future interests in property) made to any person by the donor during the calendar year 1943 and subsequent calendar years, the first $3,000 of such gifts to such person shall not, for the purposes of subsection (a), be included in the total amount of gifts made during such year.””
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“1. (a) During the lifetime of each such child Trustees shall pay the net income in quarterly or other convenient installments to him or her, even though a minor, and in addition such sum or sums from principal as in the uncontrolled discretion of the corporate trustee shall be necessary for the education, comfort and support of such child, or of the spouse or children of such child.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““ ‘ * * * the denial of the exemption in the case of gifts of future interests is .dedicated by the apprehended' difficulty, in many instances, of determining the number of eventual ■ donees and the values of their respective gifts.’.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Shefner v. Knox
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.