Anderson v. Wilson’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

112 federal appellate · 24 district · 82 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 344 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “We do not pause to consider whether a statute differently conceived and framed would yield results more consonant with fairness and reason. We take this statute as we find it.”

   13 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Bauwens v. Revcon Tech. Grp., Inc. · Kenneth J. Bauwens v. Revcon Technology Group, Inc.

2. ““We hold that the trust, and not the taxpayer, has suffered the loss resulting from the sale of the Commercial Building, and it follows that where loss has not been suffered, there is none to be allowed. * * * In so ruling, we do not forget that the trust is an abstraction, and that the economic pinch is felt by men of flesh and blood. Even so, the law has seen fit to deal with this abstraction for income tax purposes as a separate existence, making its own return under the hand of the fiduciary and claiming and receiving its own appropriate deductions.” 8”

   5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Mellott v. United States · Fielding v. Comm'r of Revenue

3. ““* * * Under the law of New York what passed to these executors was the title to the fee. By the will of this testator all his property, real and personal (with exceptions not now material), was to be converted into money. The five sons and daughters among whom the money was to be divided had no interest in the land, aside from a right in equity to compel the performance of the trust. * * * What was given to them was the money forthcoming from a sale. * * * Their interest in the corpus was that and nothing more. “ * * * What was bequeathed was an interest in a fund to be made up when the trustees were of opinion that it would be advisable to sell. This alone was given, and this has been received. There has been no loss by the taxpayer of anything that belonged to him before the hour of the sale, for nothing was ever his until the sale had been made and the fund thereby created. A shrinkage of values between the creation of the power of sale and its discretionary exercise is a loss to the trust, which may be allowable as a deduction upon a return by the trustees. It is not a loss to a legatee who has received his legacy in full.””

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Helvering v. Falk · Commissioner v. Brinckerhoff