Bonham v. Commissioner’s Empirical Analysis
1936
Citation profile
2 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 20 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 1979
2 federal appellate ·
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 Helvering v. Watts · Bassett v. Commissioner · Cleveland Trinidad Paving Co. v. Commissioner · Stoner v. Commissioner · Appeal of Mead Construction Co.
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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“If an exchange would be within the provisions of subsection (b) (1), (2), (3), or (5), or within the provisions of subsection ( l ), of this section if it were not for the fact that the property received in exchange consists not only of property permitted by such paragraph or by subsection ( l ) to be received without the recognition of gain, but also of other property or money, then the gain, if any, to the recipient shall be recognized, but in an amount not in excess of the sum of such money and the fair market value of such other property.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“It is necessary therefore to determine whether or not the exchange of * * * stock for * * * stock would be within the provisions of subsection (b) (3) if the item of cash had been omitted and only * * stock had been received in exchange for * * * stock.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“the basis of exchange and not as an indication of fair market value”
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.