Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 60 F.2d 252 - Commissioner v. Olds

Commissioner v. Olds’s Empirical Analysis

60 F.2d 252 · 1932

Citation profile

25
cited by 25 later decisions
1
states following
April 1994
most recently cited

14 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently April 1994 · most notably Fegley v. Higgins (1994), Champlin v. Commissioner (1934)

14 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

801932194019501960197019801990decided

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 Lucas v. Earl · Lucas v. American Code Co. · Pritchard Ex'X v. Norton · Burnet v. Leininger · Goltra v. Weeks

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

  1. ““It is within the power of the parties entering into a partnership agreement to restrict the rights of the several partners to the extent of making one of them the sole agent of the others for conducting the business. * * * They may also agree that profits shall not be distributed but put back in the business, or shall be distributed only upon the happening of a specified event or as authorized by the partner in charge of the business.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[i]n order to transform it into an executed one, and thus call the partnership into being, it was necessary that the parties do the things that they agreed to do.”
    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.