F. C. Donovan, Inc. v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
261 F.2d 470 · 1958
Citation profile
15 federal appellate · 3 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently July 1994 · most notably J. G. Dudley Company, Incorporated (Formerly Headen Hosiery Mills, Incorporated) v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue (1962), Commissioner v. Virginia Metal Products, Inc. (1961)
15 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
Relies on New Colonial Ice Co. v. Helvering · Libson Shops, Inc., v. Koehler, District Director of Internal Revenue · Scales v. United States · Helvering v. Metropolitan Edison Co. · Newmarket Manufacturing Co. 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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““We now think that the true explanation of New Colonial Ice Co., Inc. v. Helvering is that it came up under-the provisions of the Revenue Act of 1921, which was several years before the Congress introduced into the revenue laws the broad provisions for certain types of reorganizations to be tax-free as to the corporations. It was the obvious and stated purpose of the Congress to encourage businessmen to effectuate certain types of tax-free reorganizations for adequate business reasons, unaffected by a fear of adverse federal tax consequences. See Comment (2) to § 203 of the Revenue Act of 1924 in H.R.Rep.No.179, 68th Cong., 1st Sess. * * * If we should hold, in the present case, that the effectuation of such a reorganization has resulted in cutting out a carryback privilege which otherwise existed, we would be defeating the essential purposes of the Congress in enacting the provisions for tax-free reorganizations.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““Once one gets over the hurdle * * * that the carry-back privilege is available only where the identical ‘legal entity’ which had earned the income suffered the loss, it would seem a sterile technicality, and wholly unrealistic, to impute to the Congress an intention, in § 122(b) * * * to make the loss carry-back dependent upon the mere form in which the reorganization is cast * * * >•”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage
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.