Ellison v. Frank’s Empirical Analysis
245 F.2d 837 · 1957
Citation profile
9 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently May 1997
9 federal appellate · 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. § 117
Relies on Orvis v. Higgins · United States v. Arizona · Perry v. Perry · Kropp Forge Co. v. National Labor Relations Board · West v. Eastern Transportation Co.
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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“1. The Logger does hereby agree to fall, buck, yard, load and transport to navigable water in the Columbia River all of the timber * * *. * * * * * "4. * * * The Logger further agrees that he will perform said logging services in a good and workmanlike manner pursuant to the customs and practices of the Northwest Logging Industry * * *. "5. It is hereby agreed between all of the parties hereto that said logs, timber and forest products shall be and remain the joint property of the Parties of the First Part [Northwest] herein mentioned and that the same shall be divided or otherwise disposed of in accordance with agreement between the Parties of the First Part, and that the Party of the Second Part [Ellison] shall not have any right, title or interest therein other than the right to receive his compensation herein agreed to be paid. "6. The Parties of the First Part agree to pay to the Logger for his services in logging and delivering said timber, logs and forest products to the Columbia River at the point above designated * * *.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Ellison v. Frank“was held by another. 8 We are persuaded that the judgment of the lower court must be affirmed. It appears to have received all of the evidence offered, including parol evidence, as to the intent and purpose of the written contract between Ellison and Northwest. Appellants sought to prove that though legal title was in Northwest, Ellison was really the equitable owner of the timber. After hearing this evidence, the court found that the written contract contained the understanding and agreement of these parties, and”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Ellison v. Frank“to cut for use in their own business or for sale. 4 The Commissioner of Internal Revenue determined that appellants' income was taxable as ordinary income for the reason that Ellison (the contracting party in this case) did not own the timber, nor was he buying it under a contract right to cut the timber, nor did he cut it for sale or for use in his own business. 5 The lower court also found that the appellants”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Ellison v. Frank
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.