Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 48 F.2d 526 - Commissioner v. Moore

Commissioner v. Moore’s Empirical Analysis

48 F.2d 526 · 1931

Citation profile

29
cited by 29 later decisions
July 1973
most recently cited

20 federal appellate · 1 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently July 1973 · most notably Pacific Nat Co v. Welch (1938), Ross v. Commissioner (1948)

20 federal appellate · 1 district ·

16019311940195019601970decided

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. § 953

Relies on Eisner v. Macomber · Tyler v. United States · Shaffer v. Carter · Chicago St Ry Co v. Minneapolis Civic & Commerce Ass'n · Bedell 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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “But if land or a chattel is sold, and title passes merely upon a promise to pay money at some future date, to speak of the promise as property exchanged for the title appears to us a strained use of language, when calculating profits under the income tax. * * * it is absurd to speak of a promise to pay a sum in the future as Raving a “market value,” fair or unfair. Such rights are sold, if at all, only hy seeking out a purchaser and higgling with him on the hasis of the particular transaction. Even if we could treat the case as an exchange of property, the profit would be realized only when the promise was performed. [Emphasis ■ supplied.]”
    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.