Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Westinghouse Electric and Manufacturing Company v. Wagner Electric and Manufacturing Company: 604 (1912) Lamar none none 8th Cir. reversed Murphy v. California: 623 (1912) Lamar none none Cal. Super. Ct. affirmed Henderson v. Mayer: 631 (1912) Lamar none none 5th Cir. affirmed Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway Company v. United States: 640 ...
California v. Byers: 781 AT&T Corp. v. Hulteen: 782 Texaco Inc. v. Dagher: 783 One 1958 Plymouth Sedan v. Pennsylvania: 784 Chamber of Commerce v. Whiting: 785 Winston v. Lee: 786 Henderson v. United States (2013) 787 Maryland v. Garrison: 788 Lee v. Washington: 789 Cedar Rapids Community School Dist. v. Garret F. 790 NLRB v. Kentucky River ...
U.S. Supreme Court cases. 14 Penn Plaza LLC v. Pyett; 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis; 44 Liquormart, Inc. v. Rhode Island; 62 Cases of Jam v. United States
Marrita Murphy and Daniel J. Leveille, Appellants v. Internal Revenue Service and United States of America, Appellees (commonly known as Murphy v.IRS), [1] is a tax case in which the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit originally held that the taxation of emotional distress awards by the federal government is unconstitutional.
Opinion counts only include the bench opinions listed above; opinions relating to orders or in-chambers opinions are not included. Agreement with the Court's judgment does not guarantee agreement with the reasoning expressed in its opinion.
The product liability form of the rule (i.e., that there is no recovery for pure economic loss under a theory of strict product liability) can be traced back to Roger Traynor's decision in the California case Seely v. White Motor Co. (1965), which was later adopted by the Supreme Court of the United States in East River
Ajaxo Inc. v. E*Trade Financial Corp., 187 Cal.App.4th 1295 (2010), is the second appeal on a dispute dated back to 1999. [1] During the original 2000 case, defendant E*Trade, an online financial services company, was found liable for maliciously and willfully misappropriating trade secrets pertaining to wireless stock trading technology acquired from the plaintiff, Ajaxo.
The United States House Committee on Financial Services, also referred to as the House Banking Committee and previously known as the Committee on Banking and Currency, is the committee of the United States House of Representatives that oversees the entire financial services industry, including the securities, insurance, banking and housing industries.