TAYLOR

v.

OKLAHOMA EX REL. RUTHERFORD, COUNTY ATTORNEY

Citator

Cited By

• England v. La. State Bd. OF Med. Exam'rs, 263 F.2d 661 (5th Cir. 1959)
  …901.) It must be noted that the three-judge court in the Hitchcock case granted the defendant’s motion to dismiss the amended complaint and the Supreme Court affirmed this judgment per curiam, citing Taylor v. State of Oklahoma ex rel. Rutherford, 352 U.S. 805, 77 S.Ct. 33, 1 L.Ed.2d 38; Dantzler v. Callison, 352 U.S. 939, 77 S.Ct. 263; and Dent v. West Virginia, 129 U.S. 114, 9 S.Ct. 231. The case of Taylor v. Oklahoma, Okl., 291 [*673] P. 2d 1033, appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal quest…

  ← 1 / 2 →
• Hitchcock v. Collenberg, 353 U.S. 919 (U.S. 1957)
  …Per Curiam: The motion to affirm is granted and the judgment is affirmed. Taylor v. Oklahoma ex rel. Rutherford, 352 U. S. 805; Dantzler v. Callison, 352 U. S. 939; Dent v. West Virginia, 129 U. S. 114.…
• Lunding et ux. v. New York Tax Appeals Tribunal, 522 U.S. 287 (U.S. 1998)
  …mined that the constitutionality of not allowing nonresidents to deduct personal expenses had been settled by Goodwin v. [*295] State Tax Comm’n, 286 App. Div. 694, 146 N. Y. S. 2d 172, aff’d, 1 N. Y. 2d 680, 133 N. E. 2d 711 (1955), appeal dism’d, 352 U. S. 805 (1956), in which a New Jersey resident unsuccessfully challenged New York’s denial of tax deductions respecting New Jersey real estate taxes, interest payments, medical expenses, and life insurance premiums. The Lund-ing court adopted two rationales…

  ← 1 / 4 →