Boynton v. Commissioner’s Empirical Analysis
1979
Citation profile
5 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently June 2002
5 federal appellate ·
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 United States v. S S White Dental Mfg Co of Pennsylvania · Kresser v. Commissioner · Holladay v. Commissioner · Sellers v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue · Harrell v. Commissioner
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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“WHEREAS, the partnership is in need of cash funds to meet its obligations; and WHEREAS, Boynton is willing to supply such funds by way of loans to the partnership, but only if he receives the benefit of all partnership losses, until such time as all funds have been returned; and ARTICLE IV-1 PROFITS AND LOSSES 4.11 Except as otherwise provided for determining each partner’s share of the partnership income and loss for purposes of the federal income tax, all profits and losses of the partnership shall be allocated equally between the two partners. 4.12 Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 4.11 hereof, the partners recognize that Boynton will be required to make cash available to- the partnership from time to time until such time as it shows a positive cash flow; and that Boynton is the individual to whom the institutional lenders will look for a repayment of the partnership loans if they cannot be satisfied out of partnership funds. Because of the foregoing, the allocation between them of profits and losses for tax purposes, but not for the purpose of determining their share of distributions (which shall be governed by Section 4.11 hereof), shall be as follows: (a) The taxable income and/or loss of the partnership under the governing provisions of the Interna] Revenue Code of 1954 shall be determined; then (b) As long as there is a credit balance in either partner’s loan account, all losses shall be allocated to such partner; (c) Gains from the sale of any asset with resp”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“an entirely different allocation of profits and losses, and which has meaning in terms of the partnership agreement only in respect of the partners' liability to the Internal Revenue Service. This does not mean that the partners are precluded from fixing their distributive shares in any manner they choose. What it does mean is that in construing the partnership agreement, the formula which they select for actually dividing profits and apportioning losses among themselves will be determinative of their”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“A partner’s distributive share of income, gain, loss, deduction, or credit shall, except as otherwise provided in this section, be determined by the partnership agreement.”
2 later decisions 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.