Armco, Inc. v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis
1993
Citation profile
3
cited by 3 later decisions
1
states following
June 2009
most recently cited
3 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Commonwealth v. Passell · Com. v. Smithkline Beckman Corp. · Sabatine v. Commonwealth · SmithKline Beckman Corp. v. Commonwealth · Baehr Bros. v. Commonwealth
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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(11) A transfer: (i) for no or nominal consideration between principal and agent or straw party; or (ii) from or to an agent or straw party where, if the agent or straw party were his principal, no tax would be imposed under this article. Where the document by which title is acquired by a grantee or statement of value fails to set forth that the property was acquired by the grantee from, or for the benefit of, his principal, there is a rebutta-ble presumption that the property is the property of the grantee in his individual capacity if the grantee claims an exemption from taxation under this clause.”
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.