Stewart v. Usry’s Empirical Analysis
399 F.2d 50 · 1968
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently July 2021
4 federal appellate · 2 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
Relies on Morgan v. Commissioner · United States v. Stapf · Northeastern Pennsylvania National Bank & Trust Co. v. United States · Burdin v. Burdin · Succession of Block
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““State law creates legal interests and rights. The federal revenue acts designate what interests or rights, so created, shall be taxed. Our duty is to ascertain the meaning of the words used to specify the thing taxed. If it is found in a given case that an interest or right created by local law was the object intended to be taxed, the federal law must prevail no matter what name is given to the interest or right by state law.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““the right of enjoying a thing, the property of which is vested in another, and to draw from the same all the profit, utility and advantages which it may produce, provided it be without altering the substance of the thing. “The obligation of not altering the substance of the thing takes place only in the case of perfect usufruct.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“"Thus the `ownership' referred to in LSA-C.C. Art. 536 is not in the nature of an unqualified ownership which would exclude the rights which other persons may possess or enjoy on the termination of the usufruct. Although, as a practical matter, a surviving spouse may completely deplete, by use, disposition, or otherwise, the property which she is allowed to use and enjoy, the reverse inference is true alsoshe may not so deplete the property."”
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.