Woolford Realty Co. v. Rose’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

232 federal appellate · 16 district · 22 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 471 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Expediency may tip the scales when arguments are nicely balanced,”

   6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. West Missouri Power Co. v. Burnet · Glenn v. United States

2. “Section 240 did not require affiliated corporations to make consolidated return, but it was optional with them. The returns might be separate or consolidated, as the greater advantage of the group might suggest. But, had there been no consolidated return, and had each of the group made separate return, the gain on this stock transaction would have been taxable to Van Camp Tank Car Company. Section 240 (a) of the Revenue Act of 1926 does not purport to alter any subject-matter of taxation. It does not make taxable that which without it would not be taxed, nor withdraw from taxation that which would otherwise have been taxable. While it authorizes the single return for the affiliated group, this has to do, not with the specific items of taxation or deduction, but only with the manner o£ the return and the grouping of gains and losses, so that deductible losses accruing to one or more of the affiliates may be deducted from the total gains of all the affiliates. If this course is advantageous to the group', it may make consolidated return accordingly. In our judgment, the question in no manner depends on whether the consolidated return may be denominated the return of a “ single taxpayer.” In a certain sense, the one making such return may be so designated, but only in the sense of making a single return for the affiliates to enable them to take the advantages which the statute accords to such affiliates. But for all other purposes they remain as they were — individual taxpayers.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. James McCutcheon & Co. v. Commissioner · American Founders Corp. v. Commissioner

3. ““If, for any taxable year, it appears upon the production of evidence satisfactory to the Commissioner that any taxpayer has sustained a net loss, the amount thereof shall be allowed as a deduction in computing the net income of the taxpayer for the succeeding taxable year (hereinafter in this section called ‘second year), and if such net loss is in excess of such net income (computed without such deduction), the amount of such excess shall be allowed as a deduction in computing the net income for the next succeeding taxable year (hereinafter in this section called ‘third year’); the deduction in all cases to be made under regulations prescribed by the Commissioner with the approval of the Secretary.””

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. American Pacific Whaling Co. v. Commissioner · Wishnick-Tumpeer, Inc. v. Helvering