green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 2×
9.8 score
G Cite
cited 3× by 1 distinct case ·
“[t]he tax benefit rule is not limited to the recoveries of deductions”
cited 3× by 1 distinct case ·
“Taxable income is simply that portion of taxpayer’s gross income that Congress has chosen to tax.”
Treatment trajectory · 1981 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1981
2003
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 22 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Berkley v. Gavin
he tax benefit rule is not limited to the recoveries of deductions
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Ford Motor Land Development Corp. v. Comptroller of Treasury
taxable income is simply that portion of taxpayer's gross income that congress has chosen to tax.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Dresser Industries, Inc. v. Interstate Commerce Commission and United States of America, Wyo Ben, Inc. v. Interstate Commerce Commission and United States of America
See also A. Lindberg & Sons v. United States, 408 F.Supp. 1032 (W.D.Mich.1976), in which the district court applied this standard in reviewing a Commission decision based upon sections 26(a)(2) and 41(a), (b) 4 In reviewing the Commission's abandonment of a "common control" rule for an "actual control" standard for evaluating unreasonable discrimination by a carrier under section 41(b), we said in Nueces: The scope of our review of Interstate Commerce Commission action is reiterated in Missouri-Kansas-Texas Railroad Company v. United States, 632 F.2d 392 (5th Cir.1980), cert. denied, 451 U.S. …
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Dresser Industries, Inc. v. Interstate Commerce Commission
In reviewing the Commission’s abandonment of a “common control” rule for an “actual control” standard for evaluating unreasonable discrimination by a carrier under section 41(b), we said in Nueces: The scope of our review of Interstate Commerce Commission action is reiterated in Missouri-Kansas-Texas Railroad Company v. United States, 632 F.2d 392 (5th Cir.1980), cert. denied, 451 U.S. 1017 , 101 S.Ct. 3004 , 69 L.Ed.2d 388 (1981), which involved, in part, the Commission’s adoption of a different standard for determining whether a railway merger is “consistent with public interes…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Nueces County Navigation District No. 1 v. Interstate Commerce Commission
The Scope of Our Review The scope of our review of Interstate Commerce Commission action is reiterated in Missouri-Kansas-Texas Railroad Company v. United States, 632 F.2d 392 (5th Cir. 1980), cert. denied, 451 U.S. 1017 , 101 S.Ct. 3004 , 69 L.Ed.2d 388 (1981), which involved, in part, the Commission’s adoption of a different standard for determining whether a railway merger is “consistent with public interest.” We stated: “We can ask only whether the Commission has observed the statutory limits that Congress has set for its discretion, whether its action was arbitrary or capricious, …
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Nueces County Navigation District No. 1 v. Interstate Commerce Commission, Producers Grain Corporation v. Interstate Commerce Commission, Nueces County Navigation District No. 1 v. Interstate Commerce Commission, Producers Grain Corporation v. Interstate Commerce Commission
The Scope of Our Review 33 The scope of our review of Interstate Commerce Commission action is reiterated in Missouri-Kansas-Texas Railroad Company v. United States, 632 F.2d 392 (5th Cir. 1980), cert. denied, 451 U.S. 1017 , 101 S.Ct. 3004 , 69 L.Ed.2d 388 (1981), which involved, in part, the Commission's adoption of a different standard for determining whether a railway merger is "consistent with public interest." We stated: "We can ask only whether the Commission has observed the statutory limits that Congress has set for its discretion, whether its action was arbitrary or capricious, or wh…
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Roy Neset
See 204 F.3d at 664 (holding that doctrine of primary jurisdiction, which arises when a claim is properly cognizable in court but contains some issue within the special competence of an administrative agency, does not apply when the specially competent agency is itself the plaintiff) (citing United States v. Alcon Labs., 636 F.2d 876, 888 (1st Cir.) (noting "deference to an agency’s primary jurisdiction makes little sense in the context of an ■ enforcement proceeding initiated by the agency”), ce rt. denied, 451 U.S. 1017 , 101 S.Ct. 3005 , 69 L.Ed.2d 388 (1981)).
discussed
Cited "see"
Operation Rescue National v. United States
See United States v. Maryland, 488 F.Supp. 347, 356 (D.Md.), aff'd, 636 F.2d 73 (4th Cir.1980), cert. denied, 451 U.S. 1017 , 101 S.Ct. 3005 , 69 L.Ed.2d 388 (1981) (finding federal statute exempting members of Congress from state taxes to be constitutional).
discussed
Cited "see"
Kansas City Southern Industries, Inc. v. Interstate Commerce Commission
See Missouri-Kansas-Texas R.R. v. United States, 632 F.2d 392 , 406 (5th Cir.1980) (“the future is not subject to proof”), cert. denied, 451 U.S. 1017 , 101 S.Ct. 3004 and 101 S.Ct. 3005 , 69 L.Ed.2d 388 (1981).
discussed
Cited "see"
Kansas City Southern Industries, Inc. v. Interstate Commerce Commission
See Missouri-Kansas-Texas R.R. v. United States, 632 F.2d 392 , 406 (5th Cir.1980) ("the future is not subject to proof"), cert. denied, 451 U.S. 1017 , 101 S.Ct. 3004 and 101 S.Ct. 3005 , 69 L.Ed.2d 388 (1981).
discussed
Cited "see"
L. Peter Kaiter v. Town of Boxford, Appeal of Kevin Wood
See United States v. Alcon Laboratories, 636 F.2d 876, 884 (1st Cir.) (“The requisites may be summarized as separability, finality, urgency, and importance.”), cert. denied, 451 U.S. 1017 , 101 S.Ct. 3005 , 69 L.Ed.2d 388 (1981).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Articles of Drug Consisting of the Following: 5,906 Boxes, Etc., United States of America v. Alcon Laboratories (Puerto Rico), Inc.
See United States v. Alcon Laboratories, 636 F.2d 876 (1st Cir.), cert, denied, 451 U.S. 1017 , 101 S.Ct. 3005 , 69 L.Ed.2d 388 (1981).
discussed
Cited "see"
Lamoille Valley Railroad v. Interstate Commerce Commission
(2×)
See Missouri-Kansas-Texas Railroad v. United States, 632 F.2d 391, 411-12 (5th Cir.1980) (a thorough opinion on which our own analysis relies heavily), cert. denied, 451 U.S. 1017 , 101 S.Ct. 3004 , 69 L.Ed.2d 388 (1981); Florida East Coast Railway v. United States, 259 F.Supp. 993, 1019 (M.D.Fla.1966) (3-judge court), aff’d mem. in part and appeal dismissed in relevant part as moot, 386 U.S. 544 , 87 S.Ct. 1299 , 18 L.Ed.2d 285 (1967); Railway Labor Executives’ Association v. United States (RLEA 2d), 226 F.Supp. 521, 524-25 (E.D.Va.) (3-judge court), vacated and remanded per curiam, 379 U…
discussed
Cited "see"
Lamoille Valley Railroad Company v. Interstate Commerce Commission and United States of America, Guilford Transportation Industries, Inc., Robert W. Meserve and Benjamin H. Lacy, Trustees of the Property of Boston and Maine Corporation, Debtor, Eastern Magnesia Talc Company, State of Vermont, Intervenors. Providence and Worcester Railroad Company v. Interstate Commerce Commission and United States of America, Guilford Transportation Industries, Inc., Robert W. Meserve and Benjamin H. Lacy, Trustees of the Property of Boston and Maine Corporation, Debtor, State of Vermont, Intervenors. State of Vermont v. Interstate Commerce Commission and United States of America, Guilford Transportation Industries, Inc., Robert W. Meserve, Intervenors. Canadian National Railway Company, Central Vermont Railway, Inc., Grand Trunk Western Railroad Company and Detroit, Toledo and Ironton Railroad Company v. Interstate Commerce Commission and United States of America, Robert W. Meserve and Benjamin H. Lacy, Trustees of the Property of Boston and Maine Corporation, Debtor, Intervenors
(2×)
See Missouri-Kansas-Texas Railroad v. United States, 632 F.2d 391, 411-12 (5th Cir.1980) (a thorough opinion on which our own analysis relies heavily), cert. denied, 451 U.S. 1017 , 101 S.Ct. 3004 , 69 L.Ed.2d 388 (1981); Florida East Coast Railway v. United States, 259 F.Supp. 993, 1019 (M.D.Fla.1966) (3-judge court), aff'd mem. in part and appeal dismissed in relevant part as moot, 386 U.S. 544 , 87 S.Ct. 1299 , 18 L.Ed.2d 285 (1967); Railway Labor Executives' Association v. United States (RLEA 2d), 226 F.Supp. 521, 524-25 (E.D.Va.) (3-judge court), vacated and remanded per curiam, 379 U.S. …
cited
Cited "see"
Coastal Steel Corp. v. Tilghman Wheelabrator Ltd.
See United States v. Alcon Laboratories, 636 F.2d 876, 885 (1st Cir.1981), cert. denied, 451 U.S. 1017 , 101 S.Ct. 3005 , 69 L.Ed.2d 388 (1981).
cited
Cited "see"
Coastal Steel Corp. v. Tilghman Wheelabrator Ltd.
See United States v. Alcon Laboratories, 636 F.2d 876, 885 (1st Cir.1981), cert. denied, 451 U.S. 1017 , 101 S.Ct. 3005 , 69 L.Ed.2d 388 (1981).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Mannino
See, e.g., United States v. Ochs, 490 F.Supp. 1206, 1216 (S.D.N.Y.) (“[i]n our judicial time, over and over again we have seen ... prisoners upon ... release either ‘make good’ in life or succumb sooner or later to the magnetism of the urge to pick up where they left off”), aff'd, 636 F.2d 1205 (2d Cir.1980), cert. denied, 451 U.S. 1016 , 101 S.Ct. 3005 , 69 L.Ed.2d 388 (1981).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Railway Labor Executives' Association v. Interstate Commerce Commission
Co. v. ICC, 736 F.2d 708 , 725 (D.C.Cir.1984) (adopting holding and reasoning of Lamoille Valley ), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1208 , 105 S.Ct. 1171 , 84 L.Ed.2d 322 (1985); see also Missouri-Kansas-Texas R.R. v. United States, 632 F.2d 392 , 410-12 (5th Cir.1980), cert. denied, 451 U.S. 1017 , 101 S.Ct. 3005 , 69 L.Ed.2d 388 (1981); Crounse Corp. v. ICC, 781 F.2d 1176, 1192-93 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 890 , 107 S.Ct. 290 , 93 L.Ed.2d 264 (1986). 22 In Lamoille Valley, we reviewed the Commission's approval of a merger of the Maine Central Railroad with the Boston & Maine Railroad pursuan…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Railway Labor Executives' Ass'n v. Interstate Commerce Commission
Co. v. ICC, 736 F.2d 708 , 725 (D.C.Cir.1984) (adopting holding and reasoning of Lamoille Valley), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1208 , 105 S.Ct. 1171 , 84 L.Ed.2d 322 (1985); see also Missouri-Kansas-Texas R.R. v. United States, 632 F.2d 392 , 410-12 (5th Cir.1980), cert. denied, 451 U.S. 1017 , 101 S.Ct. 3005 , 69 L.Ed.2d 388 (1981); Crounse Corp. v. ICC, 781 F.2d 1176, 1192-93 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 890 , 107 S.Ct. 290 , 93 L.Ed.2d 264 (1986).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Zapatero v. United States
See, e.g., United States v. Ochs, 490 F.Supp. 1206, 1216 (S.D.N.Y. 1980) (“[i]n our judicial time, over and over again we have seen ... prisoners upon ... release either ‘make good’ in life or succumb sooner or later to the magnetism of the urge to pick up where they left off”), affd, 636 F.2d 1205 (2d Cir.1980), cert. denied, 451 U.S. 1016 , 101 S.Ct. 3005 , 69 L.Ed.2d 388 (1981).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Mall Properties, Inc. v. John O. Marsh, Jr., Etc., City of New Haven, Intervenor-Defendant-Appellant
See, e.g., United States v. Alcon Laboratories, 636 F.2d 876, 884-885 (1st Cir.) (remand order putting in issue order in which agency enforcement action should proceed appealable under Cohen collateral order doctrine), cert. denied, 451 U.S. 1017 , 101 S.Ct. 3005 , 69 L.Ed.2d 388 (1981); Gueory v. Hampton, 510 F.2d 1222 (D.C.Cir.1975) (Chairman’s appeal from order remanding to Civil Service Commission allowed); Paluso v. Mathews, 573 F.2d 4 (10th Cir.1978) (Secretary’s appeal from order remanding for further proceedings with respect to coal miner’s application for benefits); Citizens to …
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Roper Corporation v. National Labor Relations Board
“Substantial evidence” exists when there is sufficient evidence “to justify, if the trial were to a jury, a refusal to direct a verdict when the conclusion sought to be drawn from it is one of fact for the jury.” Illinois Central Railroad v. Norfolk & Western Railway, 385 U.S. 57, 66 , 87 S.Ct. 255, 260 , 17 L.Ed.2d 162 (1966); see also Missouri-Kansas-Texas Railroad Co. v. United States, 632 F.2d 392,399 (5th Cir.1980), cert. denied, 451 U.S. 1017 , 101 S.Ct. 3004 , 69 L.Ed.2d 388 (1981).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Ochs
v.
United States
v.
United States
No. 80-1534.
Supreme Court of the United States.
May 26, 1981.
C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.