ANNBAR ASSOCIATES ET AL.
v.
WEST SIDE REDEVELOPMENT CORP. ET AL.
ANNBAR ASSOCIATES ET AL.
WEST SIDE REDEVELOPMENT CORP. ET AL.
385 U.S. 5
Supreme Court of the United States (1966)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 4 cases
Per_curiam
Per Curiam.
The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
In re AIR Crash Disaster Near Chicago, 644 F.2d 594 (7th Cir. 1981)…ences,” Wiseman v. Missouri Pacific Railroad, 575 S.W. 2d 742 (Mo.App.1978), a standard commonly associated with the award of punitive damages.6 MDC argues that the case of Glick v. Ballentine Produce Inc., 396 S.W. 2d 609 (1965), appeal dismissed, 385 U.S. 5, 87 S.Ct. [*607] 44, 17 L.Ed.2d 5 (1966), conclusively establishes that damages awarded because of “aggravating circumstances” are not punitive. But MDC’s argument, based on selective quotation, is not persuasive. In Glick, a wrongful death case, th…
-
Young v. Harris, 599 F.2d 870 (8th Cir. 1979)…quisition by federal agency, but redevelopment by private enterprise); Council Plaza Redevelopment Corp. v. Duffey, 439 S.W. 2d 526, 528 (Mo.1969); Annbar Associates v. West Side Redevelopment Corp., 397 S.W. 2d 635, 643 (Mo.1965), appeal dismissed, 385 U.S. 5, 87 S.Ct. 41, 17 L.Ed.2d 4 (1966); Mo.Rev.Stat. § 610.010(2) (1979 Supp.). Although, in Moorer v. Department of Housing and Urban Development, supra at 183, we addressed the application of the URÁ in terms of whether the real property had been acqu…