Handy & Harman v. Burnet’s Empirical Analysis
284 U.S. 136 · 1931
Citation profile
84 federal appellate · 4 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 161 later decisions (15 by the Supreme Court) — most recently October 2014 · most notably Old Mission Portland Cement Co. v. Helvering (1934), Burnet v. Aluminum Goods Mfg Co (1933)
84 federal appellate · 4 district · 2 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.
Appellate journey
reviewedHandy v. Commissioner (from Second Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Relies on Commissioner v. Adolph Hirsch & Co. · Ice Service Co. v. Commissioner · United States v. Cleveland, P. & E. R. · American Auto Trimming Co. v. Lucas
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 161 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““It would require very plain language to show that Congress intended to permit consolidated returns to depend on a basis so indefinite and uncertain as control of stock without title, beneficial ownership or legal means to enforce it. Control resting solely on acquiescence, the exigencies of business or other considerations having no binding force is not sufficient to satisfy the statute.””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““(a) That corporations which are affiliated within the meaning of this section shall * * ’ make a consolidated return of net income and invested capital * * * “(b) For the purpose of this section two or more domestic corporations shall be deemed to be affiliated (1) if one corporation owns directly or controls through closely affiliated interests or by a nominee or nominees substantially all the stock of the other or others, or (2) if substantially all the stock of two or more corporations is owned or controlled by the same interests.” Revenue Act of 1918, § 240, 40 Stat. 1081 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Ice Service v. Commissioner, 30 F. (2d) 230, 231; Commissioner v. Adolph Kirsch & Co., 30 F. (2d) 645, 646; American Auto Trimming Co. v. Lucas, 37 F. (2d) 801, 803; United States v. Cleveland, P.&E. R. Co., 42 F. (2d) 413, 419; Commissioner v. Gong Bell Mfg. Co., 48 F. (2d) 205, 206; Onondaga Co. v. Commissioner, 50 F. (2d) 397, 399.”
1 later decision 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.