Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 283 U.S. 140 - Eckert v. Burnet

Eckert v. Burnet’s Empirical Analysis

283 U.S. 140 · 1931

Citation profile

400
cited by 400 later decisions
22
cited 22 times by the Supreme Court
2
states following
May 2015
most recently cited

160 federal appellate · 18 district · 6 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 400 later decisions (22 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 2015 · most notably Burnet v. Logan (1931), Putnam v. Commissioner (1956)

160 federal appellate · 18 district · 6 state decisions

1090193119401950196019701980199020002010decided

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

reviewedEckert v. Commissioner (from Second Circuit Court of Appeals)

Relationships

Relies on United States v. Mitchell · Eckert v. Commissioner · Southern Railway Co. v. Hussey

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

  1. ““The petitioner claims the right to deduct half that sum as a debt ‘ascertained to be worthless and charged off within the taxable year’ under the Revenue Act of 1926, c. 27, § 214(a) (7), 44 Stat. 9 , 27 ( 26 U.S.C.A. § 955 (a) (7). “It seems to us that the Circuit Court of Appeals sufficiently answered this contention by remarking that the debt was worthless when acquired. There was nothing to charge off.””
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““A deduction may be permissible in the taxable year in which the petitioner' pays cash. The petitioner says that it was definitely ascertained in 1925 that the petitioner would sustain the losses in question. So it was, if the petitioner ultimately pays his note.””
    2 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.