CITY COMPANY OF NEW YORK, INC.
v.
STERN; AND CHASE SECURITIES CORP. V. VOGEL
CITY COMPANY OF NEW YORK, INC.
STERN; AND CHASE SECURITIES CORP. V. VOGEL
312 U.S. 666
Supreme Court of the United States (1941)
Negative Treatment
Cited by 38 cases
Per_curiam
Per Curiam:
The petitions for writs of certiorari are granted and the judgments are reversed. Vandenbark v. Owens-Illinois Glass Co., 311 U. S. 538; Pomeroy v. National City Co., 209 Minn. 155; 296 N. W. 513; Donaldson v. Chase Securities Corp., 209 Minn. 165; 296 N. W. 518. The causes are remanded to the Circuit Court of Appeals for further proceedings with respect to any questions not determined by the Supreme Court of Minnesota in the Pomeroy and Donaldson cases.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (19 total)
-
Gray v. Powell, 314 U.S. 402 (U.S. 1941)…classification of producer. 114 F. 2d 752. As the question of federal law was important2 and unsettled by any decision of this Court, certiorari was granted, J. C. § 240 (a), 311 U. S. 644, and the decree below affirmed by an equally divided Court, 312 U. S. 666. The present consideration is upon a petition for rehearing. 313 U. S. 596. Seaboard, a coal-burning railroad, is a large consumer of bituminous coal. The arrangements here in question [*407] are with three mines; but as there are no significant di…
-
Chase Sec. Corp. v. Donaldson, 325 U.S. 304 (U.S. 1945)…ted persons or transactions. It appears that a number of cases were involved. Among other litigations were Stern v. National City Co. (D. C. Minn.), 25 F. Supp. 948, aff’d, sub nom. City Co. of New York v. Stern (C. C. A. 8th), 110 F. 2d 601, rev’d, 312 U. S. 666; Chase Securities Corp. v. Vogel (C. C. A. 8th), 110 F. 2d 607, rev’d, 312 U. S. 666. These were remanded by this Court to the Circuit Court of Appeals “for further proceedings with respect to any questions not determined by the Supreme Court of Min…1 / 2
-
Affronti v. United States, 145 F.2d 3 (8th Cir. 1944)…, we held that the word “sale,” as used in a taxing statute, meant “sale” in its legal sense and did not include a forfeiture of land for taxes, where the owner received no consideration for the forfeiture. The Supreme Court of the United States, in 312 U.S. 666, 61 S.Ct. 827, 85 L.Ed. 1111, without hearing argument, reversed the decision of this Court in the case referred to, in a per curiam opinion. We think that the word “sale” in the statute which makes it unlawful to sell contraband narcotics was ttsed…
Previewing 3 of 19 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Vandenbark v. Owens-Illinois Glass Co., 311 U.S. 538 (U.S. 1941)