Baylin v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
43 F.3d 1451 · 1995
Citation profile
23 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 48 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 2025 · most notably Commissioner v. Banks (2005), Srivastava v. Commissioner (2000)
23 federal appellate · 2 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
Applies 26 U.S.C. § 1033 · 26 U.S.C. § 212 · 26 U.S.C. § 263 (Interest Equalization Tax Act) · 26 U.S.C. § 61 (Payment-in-Kind Tax Treatment Act of 1983)
Relies on Helvering v. Horst · Lucas v. Earl · James v. United States · United States v. Gilmore · Interstate Transit Lines v. Commissioner
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 48 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“That the [client] assigned a portion of its . . . recovery to its attorney before it knew the exact amount of the recovery does not mean that this amount never belonged to the [client].”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[Although the partnership did not take actual possession of the funds it paid to its attorney, opting instead to pay him directly out of its eventual recovery, it is evident' that the partnership received the benefit of those funds in that the funds served to discharge the obligation of the partnership owing to the attorney as a result of the attorney’s efforts to increase the settlement amount. The fee arrangement signifies the value that the parties placed on the attorney’s services. In other words, the partnership “made such use or disposition of [its] power to receive ... the income as to procure in its place other satisfactions which are of economic worth." Helvering v. Horst, 311 U.S. 112 , 116, 61 S.Ct. 144 , 85 L.Ed. 75 (1940).”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“); Chanticleer Skyline Room, Inc. v. Greer, 271 Md. 693 , 319 A.2d 802, 806 (1974) (”
2 later decisions 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.