Burnet v. Brooks’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

41 federal appellate · 6 district · 44 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 187 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““Sec. 302. The value of the gross estate of the decedent shall be determined by including the value at the time of his death of all property, real or personal, tangible or intangible, wherever situated — * * * “(f) To the extent of any property passing under a general power of appointment exercised by the decedent (1) by will. * * * ' “Sec. 303. For the purpose of the tax the value of the net estate shall be determined— * * * “(d) For the purpose of this title, stock in a domestic corporation owned and held by a nonresident decedent shall be deemed property within the United States. * * * ””

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Commissioner v. Nevius · Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Nevius

2. ““. . . Two questions are presented. — (1) whether the property in question is covered by these provisions, and (2) whether, if construed to be applicable, they are valid under the Fifth Amendment of the Federal Constitution. The decisions below answered the first question in the negative. “First. The first question is one of legislative intention. In the ease of a nonresident of the United States, that part of the gross estate was to be returned and valued ‘which at the time of his death is situated in the United States. ’ In interpreting this clause, regard must be had to the purpose in view. The Congress was exercising its taxing power. Defining the subject of its exercise, the Congress resorted to a general description referring to the situs of the property. The statute made no distinction between tangible and intangible property. It did not except intangibles. It did not except securities. Save as stated, it did not except debts due to a nonresident from resident debtors. As to tangibles and intangibles alike, it made the test one of situs, and we think it is clear that the reference is to property which, according to accepted principles, could be deemed to have a situs in this country for the purpose of the exertion of the Federal power of taxation. Again, so far as the intention of the Congress is concerned, we think that the principles thus impliedly invoked by the statute were the principles theretofore declared and then held. It is quite inadmissible to assume that t”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 21 Cal. 3d 527 - Estate of Banerjee · Piacentini v. Bonet

3. “* * * net estate shall be determined— * * # * * * * (b) In the case of a nonresident, by deducting from the value of that part of his gross estate which at the time of his death is situated in the United States— * sfs * * * * *”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Crocker v. Commissioner · Rodiek v. Commissioner