Cook v. Commissioner’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

10 federal appellate ·

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

1. “[f]or purposes of subsection (a), [which covers pre-1982 straddle transactions], any loss incurred by a commodities dealer in the trading of commodities shall be treated as a loss incurred in a trade or business.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Gardner v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue · Gardner v. Commissioner

2. “In an economic sham transaction, there is no * * * [recognition of loss under ] section 165 , so there is none under the parallel language in section 108 .”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Krumhorn v. Comm'r · Alessandra v. Commissioner

3. “The amended section 108(a) expressly distinguishes between a loss incurred by a commodities dealer in the trade or business of trading commodities and a loss incurred in a commodities transaction entered into for profit though not connected with a trade or business. Thus, the language of section 108(a) is now completely harmonized with that of section 165(c)(1), which allows losses incurred in a trade or business, and section 165(c)(2), which allows losses incurred in any transaction entered into for profit, though not connected with a trade or business.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Krumhorn v. Comm'r