Bedell v. Commissioner’s Empirical Analysis
30 F.2d 622 · 1929
Citation profile
49 federal appellate · 3 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 81 later decisions (3 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2011 · most notably Higgins v. Commissioner (1941), Snyder v. Commissioner (1935)
49 federal appellate · 3 district · 2 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.
Relationships
Relies on Avery v. Commissioner · Royal Packing Co. v. Commissioner · Bishoff v. Commissioner · W. K. Henderson Iron Works & Supply Co. v. Blair · Blair v. Curran
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 81 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“* * * it is absurd to speak of a promise to pay a sum in the future as having a `market value', fair or unfair”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“But if land or a chattel is sold, and title passes merely upon a promise to pay money at some future date, to speak of the promise as property exchanged for the title appears to us a strained use of language, when calculating profits under the income tax. * * * it is absurd to speak of a promise to pay a sum in the future as Raving a “market value,” fair or unfair. Such rights are sold, if at all, only hy seeking out a purchaser and higgling with him on the hasis of the particular transaction. Even if we could treat the case as an exchange of property, the profit would be realized only when the promise was performed. [Emphasis ■ supplied.]”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.