Espinoza v. Lucas

61 F.3d 910, 1995 WL 313688
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided March 29, 1995·No. 94-56335·Published·Cited by 36 cases

Opinion

61 F.3d 910w

Edmundo B. Espinoza
v.
Malcolm Lucas, Honorable, Justices of Supreme Court of State
of California, Kathryn Mickle, Stanley Mosk, Joyce Kennard,
Armand Arabian, Marvin Baxter, Ronald George, Dan Lungren,
State Attorney General

NO. 94-56335

United States Court of Appeals,
Ninth Circuit.

Mar 29, 1995

NOTE: THE COURT HAS WITHDRAWN THIS OPINION

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Espinoza v. Lucas, 61 F.3d 910, 1995 WL 313688 (9th Cir. 1995).

61 F.3d 910 (Espinoza v. Lucas) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Nhuss Trust v. Comm'r
2005 T.C. Memo. 236 (U.S. Tax Court, 2005)
CUTTS v. COMMISSIONER
2004 T.C. Summary Opinion 8 (U.S. Tax Court, 2004)
Michael G. Bunney v. Commissioner
114 T.C. No. 17 (U.S. Tax Court, 2000)
BUNNEY v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE
114 T.C. No. 17 (U.S. Tax Court, 2000)
Sather v. Commissioner
1999 T.C. Memo. 309 (U.S. Tax Court, 1999)
Stevenson v. Commissioner
1999 T.C. Memo. 280 (U.S. Tax Court, 1999)
Sklar, Greenstein & Scheer, P.C. v. Commissioner
113 T.C. No. 9 (U.S. Tax Court, 1999)
Unico Sales & Mktg., Inc. v. Commissioner
1999 T.C. Memo. 242 (U.S. Tax Court, 1999)
Muhich v. Commissioner
1999 T.C. Memo. 192 (U.S. Tax Court, 1999)
Schwalbach v. Commissioner
111 T.C. No. 9 (U.S. Tax Court, 1998)
Stephen and Ann Schwalbach v. Commissioner
111 T.C. No. 9 (U.S. Tax Court, 1998)
Kustom Signals, Inc. v. Applied Concepts, Inc.
181 F.R.D. 489 (D. Kansas, 1998)
Neighbors v. Commissioner
1998 T.C. Memo. 263 (U.S. Tax Court, 1998)
Flagg v. Commissioner
1997 T.C. Memo. 297 (U.S. Tax Court, 1997)
Stephens v. Commissioner
1997 T.C. Memo. 204 (U.S. Tax Court, 1997)
Wareing Through Wareing v. United States
943 F. Supp. 1504 (S.D. Florida, 1996)
Dawson v. Lewis
61 F.3d 910 (Ninth Circuit, 1995)
Jose Garcia v. United States
61 F.3d 910 (Ninth Circuit, 1995)