Washburn v. Commissioner’s Empirical Analysis
51 F.2d 949 · 1931
Citation profile
41 federal appellate · 2 district · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 68 later decisions (5 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 1982 · most notably Higgins v. Commissioner (1941), Whipple v. Commissioner (1963)
41 federal appellate · 2 district · 4 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 Flint v. Stone Tracy Co. · Great Northern Railway Co. v. Merchants Elevator Co. · Von Baumbach v. Sargent Land Co. · United States v. Emery, Bird, Thayer Realty Co. · McCoach v. Minehill & Schuylkill Haven Railroad
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 68 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Petitioner does not claim that he was engaged in the railroad business or that he was a dealer in securities. His position is that his occupation was the personal attention given to the management of the various enterprises in which he had investments for the purpose of making those enterprises successful and profitable; that to this he gave his entire time, and was doing a great deal more than merely guarding his investments; that the loss on the sale of the railroad was occasioned in carrying on his general avocation.” (Italics added.) Deciding in favor of the taxpayer, the court said (51 F.2d at pp. 953-954): “Much is said in argument as to petitioner being engaged solely in holding the securities of the enterprises in which he was interested, and that he was a mere investor receiving the ordinary returns of ownership. A party may have investments in corporate stock, have no particular occupation, and live on the return of his investments. That would not constitute business under the statute in question. He may, however, take such an active part in the management of the enterprise in which he has investments as to amount to the carrying on of a business. In Ames v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 49 F.(2d) 853 , this court said that an executor might carry on such activities for the purpose of earning profits as would constitute the doing of business. In Bedell v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue (C.C.A.) 30 F.(2d) 622, 624 , the court said: ‘A trader on an exchange, wh”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“from the operation of any trade or business regularly carried on by the taxpayer. * * *”
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.