Blume v. Gardner’s Empirical Analysis
1966
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently December 1991
4 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. § 1402 · 26 U.S.C. § 6033 · 26 U.S.C. § 761 · 42 U.S.C. § 301 (§ 1 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 404 (§ 204 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 405 (§ 205 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 411 (§ 211 of the Social Security Act of 1935)
Relies on Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Culbertson · Commissioner v. Tower · Morrissey v. Commissioner · Weiss v. Wiener · Burk-Waggoner Oil Ass'n v. Hopkins
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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[b]ased upon our analysis of the available information and evidence, it is held that the business enterprises of the Association are, for the purposes of the Self-Employment Contributions Act of 1954, the ‘trades or businesses’ of the Association and therefore, none of such business enterprises constitutes a ‘trade or business’ of the individual members. The facts that the members contribute their services to the enterprises conducted by the Association and that they receive certain benefits from the Association do not result in the members being considered as carrying on the trades or businesses of the Association. Moreover, the Israelite House of David is not a partnership within the meaning of that term as defined ... in [the] Code. Thus it follows that the pro rata shares of its net income (whether or not distributed to the members) ... must be treated as dividends received [emphasis in the original] or by the members should not be counted in computing their net earnings from self-employment.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Katz v. Sullivan“includes a syndicate, group, pool, joint venture, or other unincorporated organization, through or by means of which any business, financial operation, or venture is carried on, and which is not, within the meaning of this title, a trust or estate or a corporation; and the term”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“recovery would be against equity and good conscience.”
1 later decision 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.