BLACK ET AL.
v.
CUTTER LABORATORIES; PARR V. UNITED STATES; COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE V. LOBUE; RAILWAY EMPLOYES' DEPARTMENT, AMERICAN FEDERATION OF LABOR, ET AL. V. HANSON ET AL.; DURLEY V. MAYO, CUSTODIAN, FLORIDA STATE PRISON; DE SYLVA V. BALLENTINE, GUARDIAN; CHICAGO & NORTH WESTERN RAILWAY CO. V. DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE OF ILLINOIS
BLACK ET AL.
CUTTER LABORATORIES; PARR V. UNITED STATES; COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE V. LOBUE; RAILWAY EMPLOYES' DEPARTMENT, AMERICAN FEDERATION OF LABOR, ET AL. V. HANSON ET AL.; DURLEY V. MAYO, CUSTODIAN, FLORIDA STATE PRISON; DE SYLVA V. BALLENTINE, GUARDIAN; CHICAGO & NORTH WESTERN RAILWAY CO. V. DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE OF ILLINOIS
352 U.S. 859
Supreme Court of the United States (1956)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 5 cases
Opinion
Full opinion text not available for this case.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Fla. E. Coast Ry. Co. v. Green, 178 So. 2d 355 (Fla. 1st DCA 1965)…opriety of considering •.reproduction cost in evaluating railroad • property appears to be Chicago and N. W. Railway Co. v. Department of Revenue, 6 Ill.2d 278, 128 N.E. 2d 722 (1955), cert. den. 351 U.S. 950, 76 S.Ct. 844, 100 L.Ed. 1474, reh. den. 352 U.S. 859, 77 S.Ct. 22, 1 L.Ed.2d 69, in which the Supreme Court ' of Illinois was confronted with a question ' very similar, if not identical, to that before us in the present appeal. In the just-cited case the Illinois Department of Revenue, in seeking to…
-
Fla. E. Coast Ry. Co. v. Fla. R.R. Assessment Bd., 22 Fla. Supp. 175 (Leon Cty. Cir. Ct. 1964)…be evaluated in another aspect of the case. Great Northern Railway Co. v. Weeks, supra. Chicago and N. W. Railway Co. v. Department of Revenue, 6 Ill. 2d 278, 128 NE 2d 722, cert. den. 351 U.S. 950, 76 S. Ct. 844, 100 L.Ed. 1474, rehearing denied 352 U.S. 859, 77 S.Ct. 22, 1 L.Ed. 2d 69, and authorities there cited. See American Jurisprudence vol. 51 page 798, title Taxation section 900, Corpus Juris Secundum vol. 84, pages 835-838, title Taxation, section 426b. Defendants’ exhibit 2, which is uncontra…
-
United Grocers, Ltd. v. United States, 308 F.2d 634 (9th Cir. 1962)…issioner v. Glenshaw Glass Co., 1955, 348 U.S. 426, 429, 430, 75 S.Ct. 473, 475, 476, 99 L.Ed. 483, rehearing denied 349 U.S. 925, 75 S.Ct. 657, 99 L.Ed. 1256; Commissioner v. LoBue, 1956, 351 U.S. 243, 76 S.Ct. 800, 100 L.Ed. 1142, rehearing denied 352 U.S. 859, 77 S.Ct. 21, 1 L.Ed.2d 69. . Note 1, supra. . See Senate Report No. 1662 and Conference Report No. 2543, which accompany the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, set forth at pp. 4793, 4825 and 5280, 3 U.S.Code Cong. & Adm.News (1954). . See also Edwa…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence