United States v. Chamberlin’s Empirical Analysis
219 U.S. 250 · 1911
Citation profile
65 federal appellate · 26 district · 27 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 179 later decisions (32 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 1997 · most notably Myers v. United States (1926), Milwaukee County v. M. E. White Co. (1935)
65 federal appellate · 26 district · 27 state decisions — followed in 12 states
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.
Appellate journey
reviewedUnited States v. Chamberlin (from Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Relies on Hertz v. Woodman · Meriwether v. Garrett · Dollar Savings Bank v. United States · United States v. Snyder · Lane County v. Oregon
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 179 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Whether an action of debt is maintainable depends, not upon the question as to who is the plaintiff, or in what manner the obligation was incurred; but it lies whenever there is due a sum either certain or readily reduced to certainty.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“'the administration of the statute may well be taken to embrace all appropriate measures for its enforcement, [unless] there is ... substantial reason for assigning to the phrase[s] ... a narrower interpretation.'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““The extent of the liability of the individual for income tax is defined by the statute, equally with the extent of the liability of the bank for the tax on undistributed earnings. In each case it is necessary, in an action of debt for the tax, to resort to sources of information outside of the statute, to ascertain the amount on which the per centum of tax fixed by the statute is to be calculated. In the case of the bank, its books and the testimony of its officers, and perhaps other means of information, may and must be resorted to. In the case of a suit for income tax, the books and accounts of the individual, and his testimony, and perhaps other means of information, may and must be resorted to. The difference between the two cases, in that respect, if there be any, will be, in every case, one of degree merely, not of principle. The statute, in imposing the per centum of tax on the income of the individual, makes a charge on him of a sum which is certain for the purposes of an action of debt, because it can be made certain through the action of a judicial tribunal, by following the rules laid down in the statute. That is the principle of the decision in the ease of the bank, and it controls the present case.””
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.