Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 81 TC 821 - Brand v. Commissioner

Brand v. Commissioner’s Empirical Analysis

1983

Citation profile

19
cited by 19 later decisions
June 2006
most recently cited

1 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently June 2006

1 district ·

150198319902000decided

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 Putnam v. Commissioner · Austad v. United States · Gilman Paint & Varnish Co. v. Legum · MacK Financial Corp. v. Scott · The Equitable Trust Company v. Bratwursthaus Management Corporation, and Francis J. Plombon and Patricia A. Plombon

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

  1. “(2) Borrowed amounts. — For purposes of this section, a taxpayer shall be considered at risk with respect to amounts borrowed for use in an activity to the extent that he— (A) is personally liable for the repayment of such amounts, or (B) has pledged property, other than property used in such activity, as security for such borrowed amount (to. the extent of -the net fair market value of the taxpayer’s interest in such property).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “Under this concept, an investor is not “at risk” if he arranges to receive insurance or other compensation for an economic loss after the loss is sustained, or if he is entitled to reimbursement for part or all of any loss by reason of a binding agreement between himself and another person. [1976-3 C.B. (Vol. 3) 87; emphasis added.]”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “Since a guarantor is entitled to reimbursement from the primary obligor, it is clear that Congress did not intend that a guarantor of a loan is personally liable for repayment of the loan within the meaning of section 465(b)(2)(A).”
    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.