Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 297 U.S. 129 - Manhattan General Equipment Co. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

Manhattan General Equipment Co. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue’s Empirical Analysis

297 U.S. 129 · 1936

Citation profile

1,243
cited by 1,243 later decisions
30
cited 30 times by the Supreme Court
19
states following
October 2020
most recently cited

474 federal appellate · 118 district · 115 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 1,243 later decisions (30 by the Supreme Court) — most recently October 2020 · most notably Ernst & Ernst v. Hochfelder (1976), United States v. Larionoff (1977)

474 federal appellate · 118 district · 115 state decisions — followed in 19 states

26501936194019501960197019801990200020102020decided

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

reviewedManhattan General Equipment Co. v. Commissioner (from Second Circuit Court of Appeals)

Relationships

Relies on Miller v. United States · N. P. Severin Co. v. Young · International Ry Co v. Davidson · Wisconsin v. Michigan

Cited together with Dixon v. Unied States · Koshland v. Helvering · Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · United States v. Larionoff · Miller v. United States

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 1,243 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “It is no more retroactive in its operation than is a judicial determination construing and applying a statute to a case in hand.”
    86 later decisions 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.