Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 206 F.2d 836 - Abney v. Campbell

Abney v. Campbell’s Empirical Analysis

206 F.2d 836 · 1953

Citation profile

51
cited by 51 later decisions
5
states following
March 2004
most recently cited

19 federal appellate · 5 district · 5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 51 later decisions — most recently March 2004 · most notably Rowlee v. Commissioner (1983), United States v. Porth (1970)

19 federal appellate · 5 district · 5 state decisions

200195319601970198019902000decided

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 Carmichael v. Southern Coal & Coke Co. · Brushaber v. Union Pacific Railroad · Chas Steward Mach Co v. Davis · Knowlton v. Moore · Helvering v. Davis

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

  1. “... in the exercise of the taxing power, congress has the widest powers of selection and classification, and . . . only in cases where the classification is so arbitrary as to have no reasonable basis whatever, can either the Fifth Amendment or the Fourteenth Amendment be invoked against a taxing law. Abney v. Campbell 206 F.2d 836, 840 (5 Cir. 1953).”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““[the argument] that the act violates the Thirteenth Amendment by imposing involuntary servitude upon an employer of domestic servants, seems to us farfetched, indeed frivolous. There is no suggestion, in the law, of the imposition of a servitude, there is merely a requirement that as to the tax due by domestic employees on account of the wages paid them by their employer, the employer must withhold the amount fixed by law and account it to the United States. The enforcement of the act is not the imposition of a servitude. It is the collection of a tax and the enforcement of an obligation, which under settled federal law appellants may be and are lawfully subjected to.” Abney v. Campbell, 206 F.2d 836, 841 (C.A. 5, 1953), cert. denied, 346 U.S. 924 , 74 S.Ct. 311 , 98 L.Ed. 417 (1954).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.