green
Positive treatment
5.4 score
Treatment trajectory · 1931 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1931
1978
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 14 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Gray v. CIR
Burnet v. Porter, 283 U.S. 230, 231 (1931) (Commissioner may reopen case and disallow a deduction after expressly deciding to allow it); Commissioner v. Wilson, 60 F.2d 501, 503 (10th Cir. 1932) (“[The Commissioner] has the power, within the period of limitations, to make such reexaminations, redeterminations, and reassessments as may be necessary to collect the entire deficiency.”); Harriton v. Lucas, 41 F.2d 429, 430 (D.C.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
In Re Estate of Lichtenstein
As the United States Supreme Court said in Klein v. United States, 283 U.S. 231, 234 , 51 S.Ct. 398, 399 , 75 L.Ed. 996, 999 (1931), "[n]othing is to be gained by multiplying words in respect of the various niceties of the art of conveyancing or the law of contingent or vested remainders".
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Dale v. Kingsley
As the United States Supreme Court said in Klein v. United States, 283 U. S. 231, 234 , 51 S. Ct. 398, 399 , 75 L.
discussed
Cited "see"
Frank C. Howard and Nancy Howard v. United States
(2×)
Moore, Federal Practice fí 0.-422[2], at 3403 (2d ed. 1974); see Burnet v. Porter, 283 U.S. 230 , 51 S.Ct. 416 , 75 L.Ed. 996 ; Commissioner v. Newport Industries, Inc., 121 F.2d 655, 657 (7th Cir. 1941); Bonwit Teller & Co. v. Commissioner, 53 F.2d 381, 384 (2d Cir. 1931), cert. denied, 284 U.S. 690 , 52 S.Ct. 266 , 76 L.Ed. 582 . 3 Accordingly, courts have consistently allowed the IRS to reconsider a taxpayer’s liability in situations analogous to the present one.
discussed
Cited "see"
First National Bank of Montgomery v. United States
(2×)
See Burnet v. Porter, 283 U.S. 230 , 51 S.Ct. 416 , 75 L.Ed. 996 , and Emery v. Commissioner, 1 Cir., 1935, 78 F.2d 437 .
discussed
Cited "see"
Cotnam v. Commissioner
(2×)
See and compare Burnet v. Porter , 283 U.S. 230 ; Tonningsen v. Commissioner , 61 F. 2d 199 ; McIlhenny v. Commissioner , 39 F. 2d 356 ; and Gilmer, Trustee v. United States , 91 F. Supp. 887 , wherein the Commissioner changed his position on a given matter in re the same taxpayer.
discussed
Cited "see"
Charles Sumner Bird v. United States
(2×)
See Burnet v. Porter, 1931, 283 U.S. 230 , 51 S.Ct. 416 , 75 L.Ed. 996 .
cited
Cited "see"
Hoblitzelle v. United States
See Klein v. United States, 43 F.(2d) 596 , 70 Ct. Cl. 151 , affirmed 283 U. S. 231 , 51 S. Ct. 398 , 75 L.
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Brown v. Commissioner
Memo. 1982-735 , aff'd. 733 F.2d 435 (6th Cir. 1984) ; see also Burnet v. Porter, 283 U.S. 230 (1931) ; Miller v. Commissioner, 23 T.C. 565 (1954) , affd. 231 F.2d 8 (5th Cir. 1956) ; H.
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Brown v. Commissioner
Memo. 1982-735 , affd. 733 F.2d 435 (6th Cir. 1984) ; see also Burnet v. Porter , 283 U.S. 230 (1931) ; Miller v. Commissioner , 23 T.C. 565 (1954) , affd. 231 F.2d 8 (5th Cir. 1956) ; H.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Daniel J. Mahoney Jr., of the Estate of James M. Cox Jr. v. United States
See Estate of Shafer, 749 F.2d at 1221 (irrelevant that the effective grantor never held legal title to property transferred into trust); see also Commissioner v. Estate of Church, 335 U.S. 632, 642 , 69 S.Ct. 322, 327 , 93 L.Ed. 288 (1949) (application of section 2036(a) not dependent on "various niceties of the art of conveyancing" (quoting Klein v. United States, 283 U.S. 231, 234 , 51 S.Ct. 398, 399 , 75 L.Ed. 996 (1931))).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Chase Nat. Bank v. United States
See, also, Broderick v. Keefe, 112 F.2d 293 , and Klein v. United States, 283 U.S. 231 , 51 S.Ct. 398 , 75 L.Ed. 996 .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
St. Louis Union Trust Co. v. Burnet
(2×)
Compare Klein v. United States, 283 U. S. 231 , 51 S. Ct. 398 , 75 L.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Hyler
(2×)
Landreth Co. v. Commissioner, 11 B.T.A. 1 , 23 (1928) ; see also Burnet v. Porter, 283 U.S. 230 , 75 L.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
BURNET, COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE,
v.
PORTER Et Al., EXECUTORS
v.
PORTER Et Al., EXECUTORS
203.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Apr 13, 1931.
Assistant Attorney General Youngquist, with whom Solicitor General Thacker and Messrs. Sewall Key and A. H. Conner, Special Assistants to the Attorney General, Erwin N. Griswold, and Clarence M. Charest, General Counsel, and Allin H. Pierce, Special Attorney, Bureau of Internal Revenue, were on the brief, for petitioner., Mr. Walter Lee Sheppard, with whom Mr. William C. Alexander, Jr., was on the brief, for respondents.
Sutherland.
Cited by 71 opinions | Published
Me. Justice Sutherland
delivered the opinion of the Court.
William W. Porter was a subscriber in the sum of $75,000 to the fund described in our opinion handed down this day in Burnet v. Houston, ante, p. 223. The facts in the present case are the same except that the Commissioner of Internal Revenue first approved the deduction and allowed a claim for refund of the proportional part of the tax, and then some time later reopened the case, disallowed the deduction and redetermined the tax. The court, of appeals sustained the power of the commissioner upon the authority of McIlhenny v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 39 F. (2d) 356; and was clearly right in doing so. That court, however, upon the main point, following its decision in the Houston case, reversed the determination of the Board of Tax Appeals in favor of the government. 39 F. (2d) 360. This is contrary to our decision in the Houston case, and upon that authority the judgment is
Reversed.