Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Cesarini v. United States, 296 F. Supp. 3 (N.D. Ohio 1969), [1] is a historic case decided by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, where the court ruled that treasure trove property is included in gross income for the tax year when it was discovered.
Lawrence A. Cunningham, [57] compared the three Veeck opinions—the Jones majority opinion, the Higginbotham dissent, and the "blistering" Weiner dissent. [58] Cunningham saw Higginbotham's dissenting opinion as the one of the three opinions that "most resonates in expressing the federal judiciary's inherent limitations in addressing such a ...
The ruling superseded Sol. Op. 132, I-1 C.B. 92 (1922), "since the position stated therein is set forth under the current statute and regulations in this Revenue Ruling", referring to 26 U.S.C. § 104 and 26 C.F.R. § 1.104-1.
Peruta v. San Diego, 824 F.3d 919 (9th Cir. 2016), was a decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit pertaining to the legality of San Diego County's restrictive policy regarding requiring documentation of "good cause" that "distinguish[es] the applicant from the mainstream and places the applicant in harm's way" (Cal. Pen. Code §§ 26150, 26155) before issuing a ...
Plymouth Dealers' Ass'n v. United States, 279 F.2d 128 (9th Cir. 1960) – auto dealers' agreement establishing a standard trade-in allowance and uniform "list price" from which to start bargaining is a price fix.
Hall Street Associates, L.L.C. v. Mattel, Inc., 552 U.S. 576 (2008), was a United States Supreme Court case that held that state and federal courts cannot, on a motion to vacate or to modify an arbitration award, expand the limited scope of judicial review specified in 9 U.S.C. §§ 10 and 11, including terms that were agreed upon by the parties.
Rule 8(b) states that the defendant's answer must admit or deny every element of the plaintiff's claim. Rule 8(c) requires that the defendant's answer must state any affirmative defenses. Rule 8(d) maintains that each allegation be "simple, concise, and direct" but allows "2 or more statements of a claim or defense alternatively or hypothetically."
Under Rule 9(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, allegations of fraud or mistake must be pleaded with particularity. [58] All appeals courts to have addressed the issue of whether Rule 9(b) pleading standards apply to qui tam actions have held that the heightened standard applies. [ 59 ]