Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 288 U.S. 152 - Atlantic City Electric Co. v. Commissioner

Atlantic City Electric Co. v. Commissioner’s Empirical Analysis

288 U.S. 152 · 1933

Citation profile

62
cited by 62 later decisions
5
cited 5 times by the Supreme Court
February 2016
most recently cited

34 federal appellate · 1 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 62 later decisions (5 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 2016 · most notably Old Mission Portland Cement Co. v. Helvering (1934), Alumax Inc. v. Commissioner (1999)

34 federal appellate · 1 district ·

390193319401950196019701980199020002010decided

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

reviewedCommissioner v. Atlantic City Electric Co. (from Second Circuit Court of Appeals)

Relationships

Relies on Handy & Harman v. Burnet · Burnet v. Aluminum Goods Mfg Co · United States Cartridge Co. v. United States · Ice Service Co. v. Commissioner

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

  1. ““With respect to control of stock, as creating the affiliation which affords a basis for a consolidated return * * *. The requirement of control, in the absence of legal title or beneficial ownership, is not satisfied by acquiescence or by business considerations without binding force. There must be a control that is legally enforceable. * * * And it must be control of ‘substantially all the stock.’ * * * “ * * * In establishing ownership or control of substantially all the stock as the criterion of a business unit, the statute made no distinction between preferred and common stock. It referred simply to ‘stock,’ and we perceive no ground upon which stock with voting right can be treated as excepted. * * * “ * * * The statute is not concerned with a failure to exercise existing rights * # * »”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Where such branches or units of a business are owned and controlled through the medium of separate corporations, it is necessary to require a consolidated return in order that the invested capital and net income of the entire group may be accurately determined.”
    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.