Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 228 F. Supp. 137 - Ewing v. Rountree

228 F. Supp. 137 - Ewing v. Rountree’s Empirical Analysis

1964

Citation profile

12
cited by 12 later decisions
2
states following
May 1991
most recently cited

5 federal appellate · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently May 1991

5 federal appellate · 3 state decisions

501964197019801990decided

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. § 2041 · 26 U.S.C. § 811

Relies on Brushaber v. Union Pacific Railroad · Tyler v. United States · Barker Painting Co. v. Local No. 734, Brotherhood of Painters, Decorators, & Paperhangers · Gwinn v. Commissioner · Wilgard Realty Co. 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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““A disclaimer or renunciation of a general power of appointment is not considered to be a release of the power. The disclaimer or renunciation must be unequivocal and effective under local law. A disclaimer is a complete and unqualified refusal to accept the rights to which one is entitled. There can be no disclaimer or renunciation of a power after its acceptance. In any case where a power is purported to be disclaimed or renounced as to only a portion of the property subject to the power, the determination as to whether or not there has been a complete and unqualified refusal to accept the rights to which one is entitled will depend on all the facts and circumstances of the particular case, taking into account the recognition and effectiveness of such a disclaimer under local law. Such rights refer to the incidents of the power and not to other interests of the decedent in the property. If effective under local law, the power may be disclaimed or renounced without disclaiming or renouncing such other interests. In the absence of facts to the contrary, the failure to renounce or disclaim within a reasonable time after learning of its existence will be presumed to constitute an acceptance of the power.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““* * * That she (donee of the power) may thereby have been put to a hard choice does not render imposition of the tax unconstitutional. Tax statutes many times do not permit even a hard choice in avoiding taxation. Here at least she (donee) had viable alternatives, preventing the inclusion of the power in the estate of the decedent from being an arbitrary and capricious exercise of the taxing power.” (Explanation added.)”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “A disclaimer or renunciation of ... a power of appointment shall not be deemed a release of such power.”
    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.