Rasmussen v. Gardner’s Empirical Analysis
374 F.2d 589 · 1967
Citation profile
11 federal appellate · 8 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 40 later decisions — most recently August 2003 · most notably Tsosie v. Califano (1981), Shore v. Califano (1978)
11 federal appellate · 8 district · 1 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
Relies on Dvorak v. Celebrezze · Celebrezze v. Warren · Delno v. Celebrezze · Kirby v. Gardner
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 40 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“However we find nothing in the language of § 211(a) of the Act (§ 411(a)) indicating that a partnership is the only basis upon which coproprietors of a business can each be credited with self-employment income for social security purposes.... While the exact nature of the legal relationship between the appellant and his wife in owning and operating the hotel might be critical for income tax purposes or for state laws of descent and distribution, we hold that it is unnecessary to characterize their relationship by any specific label for purposes of the Social Security Act. If either husband or wife had carried on the business alone there would have been no issue of earnings. The fact that both carried on the enterprise should not change the result.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(t)he congressional policy underlying federal social security legislation requires the courts to interpret the Act liberally, and any doubts should be resolved in favor of coverage.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“trade or business carried on” by such individual. Sec. 1402(a). Thus, just as nonwage income is not subject to FICA and FUTA taxes in the employee context, income which is not derived from a”
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.