Rushton v. Commissioner’s Empirical Analysis
1974
Citation profile
11 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 41 later decisions — most recently January 2016 · most notably Estate of Bright v. United States (1981), United States v. Fernon (1981)
11 federal appellate · 1 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
Relies on Helvering v. Taylor · United States v. Correll · Bingler v. Johnson · Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. A Stidger · Richardson 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 41 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“If the donor can show that the block of stock to be valued, with reference to each separate gift, is so large in relation to the actual sales on the existing market that it could not be liquidated in a reasonable time without depressing the market, the price at which the block could be sold as such outside the usual market, as through an underwriter, may be a more accurate indication of value than market quotations. * * * [Emphasis added.]”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“An aggregation principle, however, directly contradicts the regulatory intent of appraisal in a realistic market; for under such a system the question becomes not what would each block have returned if sold in the market existing at the time of valuation, but rather what would the same block have brought in a fictitious market, one flooded by the other gifts[ 11 ] [ 498 F.2d at 93 .]”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“The value of the property is the price at which such property would change hands between a willing buyer and a willing seller, neither being under any compulsion to buy or to sell, and both having reasonable knowledge of relevant facts. * * *”
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.