Griswold v. Helvering’s Empirical Analysis
290 U.S. 56 · 1933
Citation profile
24 federal appellate · 5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 42 later decisions (8 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 1955 · most notably Fernandez v. Wiener (1945), United States v. Jacobs (1939)
24 federal appellate · 5 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
reviewedCommissioner v. Emery (from Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Relies on Gwinn v. Commissioner · Knox v. McElligott · Commissioner v. Emery · Griswold 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 42 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The decedent died in 1923, while the foregoing provision was in effect. At the time of his death he and his wife held as joint tenants certain real estate in Illinois, title to which vested in them, by conveyance on October 5, 1909. The commissioner valued this real estate at $90,000, and included the whole of it in the value of decedent’s gross estate as being within the reach of § 402 (d). Upon appeal to the Board of Tax Appeals, that tribunal, disapproving in part the commissioner’s determination, held that the value of only decedent’s one-half of the property could be included for the purposes of the tax. 23 B.T.A. 635 . The circuit court of appeals affirmed. 62 F. (2d) 591. Whether this application of the statute gives it a retroactive effect is the sole question here involved; and with that we find no difficulty. Under the statute the death of decedent is the event in respect of which the tax is laid. It is the existence of the joint tenancy at that time, and not its creation at the earlier date, which furnishes the basis for the tax. By the judgment under review, only half of the value, that is to say, the value of decedent’s interest, lias been included, leaving the survivor’s interest unaffected. After the creation of the joint .tenancy, and until his death, decedent retained his interest in, and control over, half of the property. , Cessation of that interest and control at death presented the proper occasion for the imposition of a tax. See Gwinn v. Commissioner, 2”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Sec. 402. That 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— * ** *”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Kaufman v. Reinecke
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.