Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 365 F.2d 792 - Parker v. Commissioner

Parker v. Commissioner’s Empirical Analysis

1966

Citation profile

85
cited by 85 later decisions
3
states following
October 2010
most recently cited

26 federal appellate · 3 district · 5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 85 later decisions — most recently October 2010 · most notably Cupp v. Commissioner (1975), Espinoza v. Commissioner (1982)

26 federal appellate · 3 district · 5 state decisions

490196619701980199020002010decided

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 Cantwell v. State of Connecticut · Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. F Tellier · Better Business Bureau of Washington, D. C., Inc. v. United States · Reinecke v. Spalding · Trinidad v. Sagrada Orden De Predicadores De La Provincia Del Santisimo Rosario De Filipinas

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

  1. “As long as exemptions are denied ... on a nondiscriminatory basis using specific and reasonable guidelines and without inquiry into the merits of the particular religious doctrines, the withholding of religious exemptions is permissible under the Constitution.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “(3) Corporations, and any community chest, fund, or foundation, organized and operated exclusively for religious, charitable, scientific, testing for public safety, literary, or educational purposes, or for the prevention of cruelty to children or animals, no part of the net earnings of which inures to the benefit of any private shareholder or individual, no substantial part of the activities of which is carrying on propaganda, or otherwise attempting, to influence legislation, and which does not participate in, or intervene in (including the publishing or distributing of statements), any political campaign on behalf of any candidate for public office.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Whether or not an organization has a substantial nonexempt purpose, is, of course, a question of fact to be determined by the Tax Court. As a question of fact, the determination will not be disturbed by this Court unless the finding was clearly erroneous.”
    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.