Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 303 U.S. 118 - Foster v. United States

Foster v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

303 U.S. 118 · 1938

Citation profile

105
cited by 105 later decisions
5
cited 5 times by the Supreme Court
June 1987
most recently cited

52 federal appellate · 3 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 105 later decisions (5 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 1987 · most notably United States v. American Trucking Associations (1940), Enoch v. Commissioner (1972)

52 federal appellate · 3 district ·

360193819401950196019701980decided

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 Eisner v. Macomber · Old Colony Co v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue · Doyle v. Mitchell Bros. · Southern Pac Co v. Lowe · Lynch v. Hornby

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

  1. ““In the case of amounts distributed * * * in partial liquidation * * * the part of such distribution which is properly chargeable to capital account shall not be considered a distribution of earnings or profits.””
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “* * * Congress obviously intended that corporate funds distributed under the circumstances here shown should be “chargeable to capital account” and that stock purchases of the type here involved should not be considered “for the purpose of determining the taxability of subsequent distributions by the corporation.” ****** The $1,025,000, paid for the company’s stock, cannot, therefore, be considered “for the purpose of determining the taxability of subsequent dis tributions by the corporation” and this purchase of stock did not exhaust any part of the $330,578.98 profits accumulated since 1913. * * *”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “not give effect to any contrivance which would defeat a tax Congress plainly intended to impose”
    1 later decision 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.