Breech v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

7 federal appellate · 1 district ·

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

1. “The Government makes three arguments on appeal, two of which may be treated quickly. First, it argues that the liquidation of Valley-1 cannot qualify as a “complete liquidation” within the meaning of sections 331 and 337 because the assets of Valley remained in corporate solution under the effective control of the same taxpayers who controlled Valley-1, even though Valley-1 was completely dissolved under California law, citing dicta from three circuits. See Babcock v. Phillips (10th Cir. 1967) 372 F.2d 240 , 243 cert, denied, 387 U.S. 918 , 87 S.Ct. 2030 , 18 L.Ed.2d 970 ; Davant v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue (5th Cir. 1966) 366 F.2d 874, 882-883 ; Pridemark, Inc. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue (4th Cir. 1965) 345 F.2d 35, 41 . We reject the dicta, and we adopt the holding of the Second Circuit with its rationale that neither the language of sections 331 and 337 nor the legislative history of those sections sustains the Commissioner’s interpretation, so long as the taxpayers’ action is supported by a valid business purpose. (Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Berghash (2d Cir. 1966) 361 F.2d 257 ; See, Gallagher v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue (1962) 39 T.C. 144 .) 439 F.2d at 410 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. General Housewares Corp. v. United States