Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 404 F.2d 191 - Gitzinger v. United States

Gitzinger v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

404 F.2d 191 · 1968

Citation profile

11
cited by 11 later decisions
August 1986
most recently cited

7 federal appellate ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently August 1986

7 federal appellate ·

50196819701980decided

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 Foti v. Immigration & Naturalization Service · Palmer v. Bender · Commissioner v. Southwest Exploration Co. · Bankers Pocahontas Coal Co. v. Burnet · Wood v. United States

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

  1. ““ * * * Under the economic interest test, the critical consideration is whether payment is dependent upon extraction, not the method by which that payment is calculated. Thus, the difference in the typical measurement of payment under oil and gas and hard mineral leases should not affect the application of the economic interest test. “Taxpayer next argues that, even if the royalty payments are based upon production, the presence of minimum guaranteed royalty provisions in the agreement, requires a finding that hi's income was not based solely upon production as required by the economic interest test. This contention is without merit as the courts have stated many times that a minimum royalty, such as- that present in this case, is merely an advancement for future payments in the form of a guarantee and does not render payment dependent upon a factor other than extraction or production.””
    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.