Cannon v. Nicholas’s Empirical Analysis
80 F.2d 934 · 1935
Citation profile
29 federal appellate · 3 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 50 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2016 · most notably United States v. Bess (1958), United States v. Eiland (1955)
29 federal appellate · 3 district · 1 state decisions
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 11 U.S.C. § 110 · 26 U.S.C. § 115 · 26 U.S.C. § 116
Relies on Poe v. Seaborn · Chase Nat Bank of City of New York v. United States · Helvering v. City Bank Farmers Trust Co. · Everett v. Judson · Hoeper v. Tax Commission
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 50 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““We do not believe, in the light of the sweeping language used throughout these statutes, that Congress intended to limit distraint to tangible property and to the specified classes of intangibles. No reason is apparent why ‘stocks and securities’ should be subject to levy and an annuity contract not.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““If any person liable to pay any tax neglects or refuses to pay the same after demand, the amount * * * shall be a lien in favor of the United States upon all property and rights to property, whether real or personal, belonging to such person.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“if taxpayers could invest their fortunes in annuities and stand aloof when the tax collector comes around, payments of taxes would be too often a voluntary matter.” Cannon v. Nichols, 80 F.2d 934 -35 (10th Cir.1935). Thus, the Tenth Circuit concluded that”
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.