BLOCK C-11, LOT 11, ET AL.
v.
ATLANTIC CITY
BLOCK C-11, LOT 11, ET AL.
ATLANTIC CITY
434 U.S. 1055
Supreme Court of the United States (1978)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases
Opinion
Full opinion text not available for this case.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Lunding et ux. v. New York Tax Appeals Tribunal, 522 U.S. 287 (U.S. 1998)…ipal residences of residents), appeal dism’d, 449 U. S. 977 (1980); Davis v. Franchise Tax Board, 71 Cal. App. 3d 998, 139 Cal. Rptr. 797 (1977) (involving State’s denial of income averaging method of tax computation to nonresidents), appeal dism’d, 434 U. S. 1055 (1978); Wilson v. Department of Revenue, 267 Ore. 103, 514 P. 2d 1334 (1973) (involving State’s limitation of nonresident’s deductions to those connected with in-state income), appeal dism’d, 416 U. S. 964 (1974); Anderson v. Tiemann, 182 Neb. 393,…
-
O.J. Hotmar and Nellie Hotmar v. Lowell H. Listrom & Co., Inc., 808 F.2d 1384 (10th Cir. 1987)…though there be a non-discretionary account, the broker may still exercise control over the account. Mihara v. Dean Witter & Co., Inc., 619 F. 2d 814, 821 (9th Cir.1980); Newburger, Loeb & Co., Inc. v. Gross, 563 F. 2d 1057 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 1055, 98 S.Ct. 769, 54 L.Ed.2d 782 (1978); Carras v. Burns, 516 F. 2d 251 (4th Cir.1975). [*1386] Such control, though not formal, may be inferred from all the facts and circumstances. In the instant case, all transactions were with the prior approval o…