Dodd v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
345 F.2d 715 · 1965
Citation profile
12 federal appellate · 4 district · 8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 37 later decisions — most recently August 2017 · most notably Putnam v. Putnam (1974), Greene v. United States (1973)
12 federal appellate · 4 district · 8 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
Applies 26 U.S.C. § 2056 · 26 U.S.C. § 812
Relies on Riggs v. Del Drago · Harrison v. Northern Trust Co. · United States v. Stapf · Gallagher v. Smith · Willcox v. Penn Mutual Life Insurance
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 37 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““. . . It would, indeed, be difficult in the usual case, where the proportion of the residue left to the wife does not exceed the allowable marital deduction, to attribute to the testator an intention that his estate should pay an increased estate tax and that his widow’s distributable share should be reduced. In such cases there is no place for the operation of the canon of construction which imposed the burden of the estate tax on all who shared in the residue. “. . . The will here made the classic devise and bequest to the wife of one-half of the residuary estate, which is the maximum allowable as the marital deduction, and gave the remaining one-half to the children. It is true that if the wife is relieved of the estate tax the children’s remaining one-half of the residue will be reduced by requiring it to bear all of the estate tax. But the alternative is either to reduce the share of the children by requiring them to bear the entire but smaller estate tax, or to reduce the wife’s share and thus increase the total estate tax. A will written after the marital deduction provision was established, which grants a wife a share of the residue similar to that authorized as the marital deduction is presumably intended to come within that provision. Even if the wife and children were to be considered equally the intended beneficiaries of the testator’s bounty, the balance would be overcome by tire consideration of reducing the total estate tax. In these circumstances, therefore, ”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Jackson v. Jackson · Davis v. Davis“the wife's share of the residue is not required to bear any share of the estate tax.”
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.