Jackson v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
317 F.2d 821 · 1963
Citation profile
15 federal appellate ·
Appellate journey
Relationships
Applies 26 U.S.C. § 812
Relies on Leahy v. United States · Estate of King v. King · Estate of Edward A. Cunha, Deceased, Bank of America, National Trust and Savings Association v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue · United States v. Quivey · 42 Cal. 2d 728 - Bonnen v. Ruoff
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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Under California law a widow is entitled to a reasonable allowance out of her deceased husband’s estate for her maintenance during the progress of the settlement of the estate and which allowance, in the discretion of the court may take effect from the date of death. * * * The right to a widow’s allowance is purely statutory. [Jackson v. United States, 317 F. 2d 821 , 824-825, affd. 376 U.S. 503 (1964).]”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Only that portion of the allowance to the widow for the period from the date of the decedent's death to the date of the court order is involved. The question presented is whether the $42,000.00 total of family allowance payments which were due and payable on the date of the court order were vested and thus deductible under the Marital Deduction provisions of the Internal Revenue Code.”
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.