Hoffman v. McGinnes’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

15 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

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

1. “(a) Allowance of Marital Deduction. — For purposes of the tax imposed' by section 2001, tbe value of the taxable estate shall, except as limited by subsections (b), (c), and (d), be determined by deducting from the value of the gross estate an. amount equal to the value of any interest in property which passes or has passed from the decedent to his surviving spouse, but only to the extent that such interest is included in determining the value of the gross estate. (b) Limitations in the Case of Life Estate or Other Terminable Interest.- — ■ ,(1) General rule. — Where, on the lapse of time, on the occurrence of an event or contingency, or on the failure of an event or contingency to occur, an interest passing to the surviving spouse will terminate or fail, no deduction shall be allowed) under this section with respect to such interest— (A) if an interest in such property passes or has passed (for less than an adequate and full consideration in money or money's worth) from the decedent to any person other than such surviving spouse (or the estate of such Bpouse).; and (B) if by reason of such passing such person (or his heirs or assigns) may possess or enjoy any part of such property after such termination or failure of the interest so passing to the surviving spouse; and no deduction shall be allowed with respect to such interest (even if such deduction is not disallowed under subparagraphs (A) and (B))— (C) if such interest is to be acquired for the surviving spouse, pursuant”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Estate of Holland v. Commissioner · Field v. Commissioner

2. “Further, a power is not `exercisable in all events' if it may be exercised for a limited purpose only * * *. Likewise, if there are any restrictions, either by the terms of the instrument or under applicable local law, on the exercise of a power to consume property (whether or not held in trust) for the benefit of the spouse, the power is not exercisable in all events. Thus, if a power of invasion is exercisable only for the spouse's support, or only for her limited use, the power is not exercisable in all events. In order for a power of invasion to be exercisable in all events, the surviving spouse must have the unrestricted power exercisable at any time during her life to use all or any part of the property subject to the power, and to dispose of it in any manner, including the power to dispose of it by gift (whether or not she has power to dispose of it by will).”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Piatt v. Gray · Piatt v. Gray

3. ““It would be difficult, if not impossible, to state any more explicitly an intent to confer ‘an unrestricted power exercisable at any time during her life to use all or any part of’ the principal of the decedent’s trust estate.””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Estate of Bourke v. Commissioner · 238 F. Supp. 40 - Security-Peoples Trust Company v. United States