Davis v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1995
Citation profile
20 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently November 2023 · most notably Williams v. Lara (2001), Daimler-Benz Aktiengesellschaft v. Olson (2000)
20 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.
Appellate journey
reviewedthe decision below (from Texas 126th Judicial District Court)
Relationships
Applies 11 U.S.C. § 507
Relies on Cobb v. Harrington · Hutcherson v. Sovereign Camp · Linwood v. NCNB Texas · Rosenow v. Illinois, Department of Revenue · North Alamo Water Supply Corp. v. Willacy County Appraisal District
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 25 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]he seller must also be characterized as a tax collector, and because of this, seller and purchaser liability to the state as taxpayers arises for differing reasons: the purchaser, as a statutory debtor to the seller but ultimately liable to the state, owes sales tax on its purchase transaction; the seller also owes the state the sales taxes a customer incurs because the seller must, under the state’s authority, collect those taxes. Under the Act, then, the economic burden of the tax is on the purchaser: the sales tax will either be collected by the seller from the purchaser under the state’s authority and then remitted to the state; or, if the seller fails to bill the purchaser, the tax will be collected directly by the state from either the seller or purchaser.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“if not collected by the retailer is owed by the purchaser.” POC 5128 Objection at 11. Debtors’ assertions notwithstanding, nothing in section 151.103’s language suggests that a purchaser owes tax to anyone but the seller. Moreover, section 151.103 is almost identical to section 151.052(a), the section at issue in Davis , where the court ruled that “[w]hile sellers have a legal duty to collect sales taxes from purchasers, both sellers and purchasers are liable to the state for sales taxes.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“The transcript and statement of facts, if any, shall be filed in the appellate court within sixty days after the judgment is signed, ... or if any party has timely filed a request for findings of fact and conclusions of law in a ease tried without a jury, within one hundred twenty days after the judgment is signed.”
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.