Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 210 F.2d 792 - McHarg v. Fitzpatrick

McHarg v. Fitzpatrick’s Empirical Analysis

210 F.2d 792 · 1954

Citation profile

15
cited by 15 later decisions
2
states following
June 1979
most recently cited

5 federal appellate · 2 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently June 1979

5 federal appellate · 2 district · 2 state decisions

70195419601970decided

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 Trust Co of New York v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue · Huntington Nat. Bank v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue · State Sav. Loan & Trust Co. v. Commissioner · Macmanus v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

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

  1. ““ * * * whatever may be the proper differentia to determine whether there are one, or several, trusts, it would be anomalous to make any part of it the settlor’s understanding of the legal effect of what he was doing — or his purpose in doing it. It would of course be ■quite untrue — especially in the field •of torts — to say that a man’s purpose can* never be a determinant of his ■civil liabilities; but, so far as we can recall, it is never a measure of his public duties. Income taxes are imposed upon persons because of what they receive from property held by them, or for their benefit; and it ■cannot be permissible to make them turn, either upon what rights the ■settlor supposed he had created, or what rights he may have wished to create, but did not. * * * ” (Emphasis supplied.)”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “during the existence of the 'share,' qua 'share,' it was not to receive any addition from any of the other 'shares'; nor was it to be drawn upon in favor of another 'share.'”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[each] had only one beneficiary, and he or she had no possible interest in any other 'share' while the res of that 'share' was held in trust at all”
    1 later decision 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.