Walsh v. Commissioner’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 federal appellate ·

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

1. ““§ 188. Different taxable years of partner and partnership “If the taxable year of a partner is different from that of the partnership', the inclusions with respect to the net income •of the partnership, in computing the net income of the partner for his taxable year, ■shall be based upon the net income of the partnership for any taxable year of the partnership ('whether beginning on, before, or after January 1, 1939) ending within or with the taxable year of the partner.””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Girard Trust Co. v. United States · Estate of Knipp v. Commissioner

2. “To the same effect as above is Heiner v. Mellon, 304 U.S. 271 [ 58 S.Ct. 926 , 82 L.Ed. 1337 ]. This case was decided by the Supreme Court some forty-eight days after it decided Guaranty Trust Co. of New York, supra, and in our opinion, throws more light on the issue which we have here to decide than does the Guaranty Trust Co. case.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Estate Of Frank H. Knipp · Estate of Knipp v. Commissioner

3. “The evidence here is clear that after Elliott's death there were no new partnerships created. Although the old partnerships were dissolved by Elliott's death, they were not terminated. Dial v. Martin, Tex. Civ.App., 37 S.W.2d 166, 177. The business being conducted by the partnerships had to be wound up by the surviving partners and an accounting made to the heirs and personal representatives of the deceased partner. Dial v. Martin, supra. In that case the court, among other things said: `Where a partnership is dissolved by the death of one of the partners, the surviving partner or partners have the right, and, moreover, it is their duty, to wind up the firm's business, and he is, in the eyes of the law, a trustee of the firm assets for that purpose, and as such trustee is entitled to the exclusive possession of all firm assets. * * *.' 42 "To the same effect as above is Heiner v. Mellon, 304 U.S. 271 [58 S.Ct. 926, 82 L.Ed. 1337]. This case was decided by the Supreme Court some forty-eight days after it decided Guaranty Trust Co. of New York, supra, and in our opinion, throws more light on the issue which we have here to decide than does the Guaranty Trust Co. case.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Estate of Knipp v. Commissioner