Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 57 TC 503 - Lester v. Commissioner

Lester v. Commissioner’s Empirical Analysis

1972

Citation profile

15
cited by 15 later decisions
July 2001
most recently cited

3 federal appellate ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently July 2001

3 federal appellate ·

401972198019902000decided

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 Ithaca Trust Co. v. United States · Commissioner v. Maresi · Maresi v. Commissioner · Barry v. Chrysler Corp. · Irene Gowetz, Executors v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

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

  1. “The use of actuarial tables such as those found in section 20.2031-7, Estate Tax Regs., to ascertain the value of such a claim, especially when it is periodic in nature, has been the administrative and judicial norm for many years. Estate of Pompeo M. Maresi, 6 T.C. 582, 586 (1946), affirmed sub nom. Commissioner v. Maresi, 156 F.2d 929 (C.A. 2, 1946); Estate of Francis Browne Grinnell, 44 B.T.A. 1286, 1288 (1941), modified sub nom. Commissioner v. State Street T. Co., 128 F.2d 618 (C.A. 1, 1942); Estate of Reginald L. Taylor, 39 T.C. 371, 374 (1962), affirmed sub nom. Gowetz v. Commissioner, 320 F.2d 874 (C.A. 1, 1963); Rev. Rui. 67-304, 1967- 2 C.B. 224 .”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “We think there is no reason in this case to go beyond the principle of Ithaca Trust Co. v. United States, supra —that the value of the judgment in the divorce proceedings is to be determined as of the date of the husband’s death by the use of the tables employed here by the Commissioner, which take into consideration the contingency of the wife’s death prior to final payment of the installments to become due. There is no need to go into the effect of events subsequent to the husband’s death, i.e., how the estate finally freed itself of a continuing and admitted liability.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “of an annuity for a term certain, of an income interest for a term certain and of a remainder interest postponed for a term certain”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.