Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 281 U.S. 115 - Lucas v. Ox Fibre Brush Co.

Lucas v. Ox Fibre Brush Co.’s Empirical Analysis

281 U.S. 115 · 1930

Citation profile

476
cited by 476 later decisions
18
cited 18 times by the Supreme Court
3
states following
October 2017
most recently cited

205 federal appellate · 12 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 476 later decisions (18 by the Supreme Court) — most recently October 2017 · most notably Welch v. Helvering (1933), Helvering v. Horst (1940)

205 federal appellate · 12 district · 3 state decisions

1260193019401950196019701980199020002010decided

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.

Appellate journey

reviewedOx Fibre Brush Co. v. Blair (from Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals)

Relationships

Relies on United States v. Anderson · Lucas v. American Code Co. · American National Co. v. United States · Ox Fibre Brush Co. v. Blair

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

  1. “ordinary and necessary expenses paid or incurred during the taxable year in carrying on any trade or business, including a reasonable allowance for salaries * * *”
    7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “as a matter of internal policy having appropriate regard to the advantage of recognition of skill and fidelity as a stimulus to continued effort.”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “This section [Section 212(b) of the Revenue Act of 1918] relates to the method of accounting; the Commissioner may make the computation on a basis that does clearly reflect the income, if the method employed by the taxpayer does not. But this section does not justify the Commissioner in allocating to previous years a reasonable allowance as compensation for services actually rendered, when the compensation was properly paid during the taxable year and the obligation tó pay was incurred during that year and not previously. In the present instance, the expense could not be attributed to earlier years, for it was neither paid nor incurred in those years. There was no earlier accrual of liability. It was deductible in the year 1920 or not at all. Being deductible as a reasonable payment, there was no authority vested in the Commissioner to disregard the actual transaction and to readjust the income on another basis which did not respond to the facts. [Id. at 120, 50 S.Ct. at 274, 74 L.Ed. at 736.] [Emphasis supplied.]”
    4 later decisions 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.