Harmar Coal Co. v. Heiner’s Empirical Analysis
26 F.2d 729 · 1928
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently December 1986
1 federal appellate · 2 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
Relies on Flint v. Stone Tracy Co. · Von Baumbach v. Sargent Land Co. · United States v. Emery, Bird, Thayer Realty Co. · McCoach v. Minehill & Schuylkill Haven Railroad · Zonne v. Minneapolis Syndicate
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“We note, first, that the tax is assessed upon “doing business,” and business has been defined by the Supreme Court in the case of Flint v. Stone Tracy Co., 220 U.S. 107, 171 , 31 S.Ct. 342, 357 ( 55 L.Ed. 389 , Ann.Cas.l912B, 1312), as follows: “ ‘Business’ is a very comprehensive term and embraces everything about which a person can be employed. Black’s Law Dict. 158 (sic), citing People v. Commissioners of Taxes, 23 N.Y. 242, 244 . ‘that which occupies the time, attention, and labor of men for the purpose of a livelihood or profit.’ Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, vol. I, p. 273 [406].” We note further that the decision in each case must depend upon the particular facts before the court, and that in Von Baumbach v. Sargent Land Co., 242 U.S. 503, 516 , 37 S.Ct. 201, 204 ( 61 L.Ed. 460 ), the Supreme Court, Mr. Justice Day delivering the opinion, had this to say with reference to the test applicable to such facts: “The fair test to be derived from a consideration of all of them is between a corporation which has reduced its activities to the owning and holding of property and the distribution and its avails and doing only the acts necessary to continue that status, and one which is still active and is maintaining its organization for the purpose of continued efforts in the pursuit of profit and gain and such activities as are essential to those purposes.” Then, again, the Supreme Court, further dealing with this subject in the case of Edwards v. Chile Copper Co., 270 U.S. 452, 455”
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.