Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 33 F.2d 75 - Simmons Co. v. Commissioner

Simmons Co. v. Commissioner’s Empirical Analysis

33 F.2d 75 · 1929

Citation profile

34
cited by 34 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
March 1992
most recently cited

22 federal appellate · 3 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 34 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 1992 · most notably Helvering v. Union Pacific Railroad (1934), Estate of Thomas v. Commissioner (1985)

22 federal appellate · 3 district ·

14019291930194019501960197019801990decided

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

Applies 26 U.S.C. § 986

Relies on National Lead Co. v. United States · LaBelle Iron Works v. United States · Willcuts v. Milton Dairy Co. · Baltzell v. Mitchell · Emerson Electric Mfg. Co. v. Commissioner

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

  1. ““In the instant case, appellant sold to Estabrook & Co. (the bankers) preferred stock of the value of $3,-000,000 at a discount of $8 per share; so that appellant received, not $3,000,000, but $2,760,000; in other words, $92 per share. The effect of this transaction was to reduce by the amount of $240,000 the capital available to appellant. In other words, it represents a capital expenditure, and should be charged against the proceeds of the stock, and not be recouped out of operating earnings. The regulations and rulings of the Treasury Department have consistently been to the effect ■ that expenses incident to the sale of the capital stock of a corporation are not ‘ordinary and necessary expenses incurred in carrying on the business’ of such corporation.” (Emphasis supplied.)”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “• “While expenses for organization or for obtaining additional capital are frequent in growing and successful enterprises, we think it clear that they are not ‘ordinary and necessary expenses’ in the productive operations of such concerns within the meaning of the tax laws.””
    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.