Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 256 F.2d 795 - Hight v. United States

Hight v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

256 F.2d 795 · 1958

Citation profile

15
cited by 15 later decisions
1
states following
June 2017
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently June 2017

4 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

601958196019701980199020002010decided

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. § 170

Relies on Morgan v. Commissioner · Lyeth v. Hoey · United States v. Pelzer · Singles v. United States · People v. Young Men's Christian Ass'n

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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “In granting tax deductions for bequests of the type listed in [predecessor to Section 2055(a) (2) and (3)], Congress could not have intended to encourage bequests for eleemosynary purposes only to have them defeated by narrow construction.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “In the Wasserman bequest, however, no such limitation for charitable purposes can be implied, absent a similar context. As the court said in Hight: 36 The overwhelming weight of authority supports the principle that the word”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “such benevolent purposes as, in their opinion, will constitute a fitting testimonial or memorial for me and, in some degree, extend my usefulness and helpfulness to others”
    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.