Clark v. Commissioner’s Empirical Analysis
1958
Citation profile
33 federal appellate · 3 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 59 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 2013 · most notably Barnhill v. Johnson (1992), Cefalu v. Commissioner (1960)
33 federal appellate · 3 district ·
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 Holland v. United States · Helvering v. Taylor · Cohan v. Commissioner · Gariepy v. United States · Davis 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 59 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“increase in net worth plus non-deductible disbursements minus non-taxable receipts equals taxable net income.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Estate of Josephine Mazzoni, Deceased, Peter Mazzoni, and Peter Mazzoni v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue. Appeal of Peter Mazzoni, Individually and as of the Estate of Josephine Mazzoni, in No. 19338. Charles J. Runzo and Lena Runzo, in No. 19339 v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue · Kramer v. Commissioner“[i]t does not matter that the check was not cashed or deposited or the drawer's account charged until the following year. The check is regarded as payment on a condition subsequent, and if the condition of honor on presentment is met the payment is regarded as absolute from the time the check was delivered.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(2) Substantial underestimate of estimated tax. If 80 per centum of the tax (determined without regard to the credits under sections 32 and 35), in the case of individuals other than farmers exercising an election under section 60(a) or 66 2/3 per centum of such tax so determined in the case of such farmers, exceeds the estimated tax (increased by such credits), there shall be added to the tax an amount equal to such excess, or equal to 6 per centum of the amount by which such tax so determined exceeds the estimated tax so increased, whichever is the lesser * * *”
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.