Commissioner v. Moran’s Empirical Analysis
1956
Citation profile
23 federal appellate · 3 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 34 later decisions — most recently June 2011 · most notably Homan v. United States (1960), Wilson v. United States (1967)
23 federal appellate · 3 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
Applies 26 U.S.C. § 181 · 26 U.S.C. § 24
Relies on Birmingham v. Geer · Sutter v. Commissioner · Pfaff v. Commissioner · United States v. Jeffers · Lazier v. United States
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 34 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“* * * This court has repeatedly held, particularly in tax matters, that the decision of another Court of Appeals should be followed unless demonstrably erroneous or there appear cogent reasons for its rejection. Birmingham v. Geer, 8 Cir., 1950, 185 F.2d 82 , 85, certiorari denied 1951, 340 U.S. 951, 71 S.Ct. 571, 95 L.Ed. 686.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Everyone must have food and shelter. They are personal things essential to all of us alike regardless of occupation. They do not lose their personal characteristics because they may contribute indirectly to a taxpayer's business activities.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“True it is, as has been pointed out previously, that the items here involved may be viewed, on the one hand, as business expenses, on the other hand, as personal. We think their essential nature, their inherent and dominant attributes characterize them as personal with a tinge of business and not as business with a personal tinge. And we see Section 24 (a) (1) as an absolute blanket inclusion of these items in income, thereby prohibiting their deductibility, unless the federal statutes expressly and clearly provide to the contrary. There are no such statutes.”
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.