Dosher v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
730 F.2d 375 · 1984
Citation profile
2 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently July 2019
2 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
Applies 26 U.S.C. § 165
Relies on Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. National Alfalfa Dehydrating and Milling Company · Pulvers v. Commissioner · Lettie Pate Whitehead Foundation, Inc. v. United States · 397 F. Supp. 216 - Bartlett v. United States · Broido 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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[section 165](c)(3) speaks of losses of property. We find this language expressive of congressional intent to narrow the types of losses deductible under this subsection. * * * [T]he loss must be a damage or loss to physical property.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Pang v. Comm'r“'property' as used in [section] 165(c)(3) includes money only if the actual currency or coinage is physically damaged or destroyed by the enumerated or implied casualties”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Pang v. Comm'r
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.