Supreme Court· 11/8/1937
Groman v. Commissioner
Citations
- 302 U.S. 82
- 58 S. Ct. 108
- 82 L. Ed. 63
- 1937 U.S. LEXIS 534
- 2 C.B. 286
- 19 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 1214
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- “[W]hen an exclusive definition is intended the word ‘means’ is employed, * * * whereas here the word used is ‘includes.’”
- “when an exclusive definition is intended the word ‘means’ is employed, . . . whereas here the word used is ‘includes’ ”
- “[W]hen an exclusive definition is intended the word ‘means’ is employed, * * * whereas here the word used is ‘includes.’ ”
- “[W]hen an exclusive definition is intended the word ‘means’ is employed .... ”
- “When an exclusive definition is intended the words ‘means’ is employed.”
- “When an exclusive definition is intended the words ‘means’ is employed.”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Roberts, Black
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
66 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Burgess v. United StatesSupreme Court· 2008-04-16· cited 267×
- Drawbridge Special Opportunities Fund LP v. BarnetSecond Circuit· 2013-12-11· cited 78×
- Potash Co. of America v. International Minerals & Chemical Corp.Tenth Circuit· 1954-07-03· cited 51×
- American Potash & Chemical Corporation v. The United StatesCourt of Claims· 1968-07-17· cited 35×
- Walter F. Vorbleski and Florence Vorbleski v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueThird Circuit· 1978-12-01· cited 34×
- June M. Carlberg, by Vida M. Frick, Guardian v. United StatesEighth Circuit· 1960-08-12· cited 33×
- Pearson v. McGrawSupreme Court· 1939-12-04· cited 30×
- United States v. DiCristinaSecond Circuit· 2013-08-06· cited 25×
- M. v. Marine Co. v. State Tax CommissionSupreme Court of Missouri· 1980-10-15· cited 25×
- Berman v. Neo@Ogilvy LLCSecond Circuit· 2015-09-10· cited 19×
- Illinois Water Service Co. v. CommissionerU.S. Tax Court· 1943-12-24· cited 16×
- Arden S. Heverly and Sophia S. Heverly v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueThird Circuit· 1980-05-25· cited 15×
- Weicker v. HowbertTenth Circuit· 1939-03-27· cited 12×
- Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. First Nat. BankThird Circuit· 1939-06-17· cited 12×
- Maine Steel, Inc. v. United StatesD. Maine· 1959-06-23· cited 12×
- H.J. Heinz Co. & Subsidiaries v. United StatesFederal Claims· 2007-05-25· cited 12×
- Bedford v. CommissionerU.S. Tax Court· 1943-12-22· cited 11×
- Estate of Crafts v. CommissionerU.S. Tax Court· 1980-09-25· cited 11×
- Verble v. Morgan Stanley Smith Barney, LLCE.D. Tennessee· 2015-12-08· cited 11×
- Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. FreundThird Circuit· 1938-06-22· cited 9×
Cites
5 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Pinellas Ice & Cold Storage Co. v. CommissionerSupreme Court· 1933-01-09· cited 390×
- Helvering v. Minnesota Tea Co.Supreme Court· 1935-12-16· cited 195×
- John A. Nelson Co. v. HelveringSupreme Court· 1935-12-16· cited 110×
- Helvering v. WattsSupreme Court· 1935-12-16· cited 75×
- G. & K. Manufacturing Co. v. HelveringSupreme Court· 1935-12-16· cited 37×
Other cases named Groman v. Commissioner
3 other CourtListener records share this case name.
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.