Caamano v. Commissioner’s Empirical Analysis
1989
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 1 district ·
Relationships
Relies on United States v. Collins · Commissioner v. Trustees Common Stock John Wanamaker Philadelphia · Trustees Common Stock John Wanamaker Philadelphia Under Will of Wanamaker v. Commissioner · Dunn Trust 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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“For purposes of this part, the term “property” means money, securities, and any other property; except that such term does not include stock in the corporation making the distribution (or rights to acquire such stock).”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“We also reject the Commissioner’s argument that section 355 was meant to prevent indirect redemptions based on its earlier decision in Dunn Trust v. Commissioner, 86 T.C. 745 (1986). The anti-bailout provisions of section 355, which allow redeeming shareholders to “bail out” corporate assets by selling the stock of the subsidiary, do not apply in this case. As the Tax Court stated, after December 1982, a holder of International Common could not sell his interest in McDermott International without simultaneously selling his interest in McDer-mott, Inc. No bail-out was thus possible. The Tax Court thus properly held that section 355 was not applicable and its ruling is in all respects AFFIRMED.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Since the distribution of stock in the instant ease was the corporation’s own stock, section 304 does not apply. The court’s reasoning is persuasive and is reinforced by other courts’ interpretations of the purpose of section 304. In United States v. Collins, 300 F.2d 821 (1st Cir.1962), the First Circuit stated: “Section 304 was enacted in the 1954 Code to close loopholes in the tax laws deriving from transactions involving ‘brother-sister corporations.’ This involves situations where one or more individuals are in effective control of each of two corporations, and one of the corporations acquires stock of the other corporation.””
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.