Heisey v. County of Alameda
352 U.S. 921, 77 S. Ct. 224, 1 L. Ed. 2d 157, 1956 U.S. LEXIS 71
Opinion
The appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Heisey v. County of Alameda, 352 U.S. 921, 77 S. Ct. 224, 1 L. Ed. 2d 157, 1956 U.S. LEXIS 71 (1956).
352 U.S. 921 (Heisey v. County of Alameda) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Diamond International Corp. v. Boas
92 Cal. App. 3d 1015 (California Court of Appeal, 1979)
Trim, Inc. v. County of Monterey
86 Cal. App. 3d 539 (California Court of Appeal, 1978)
First City Bank v. Franchise Tax Board
70 Cal. App. 3d 444 (California Court of Appeal, 1977)
Los Altos Property Owners Assn. v. Hutcheon
69 Cal. App. 3d 22 (California Court of Appeal, 1977)
Duskin v. San Francisco Redevelopment Agency
31 Cal. App. 3d 769 (California Court of Appeal, 1973)
Blair v. Pitchess
486 P.2d 1242 (California Supreme Court, 1971)
Johnson v. Presbyterian Homes of Synod of Fla., Inc.
239 So. 2d 256 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1970)
Walz v. Tax Comm'n of City of New York
397 U.S. 664 (Supreme Court, 1970)
Walz v. Tax Commission
246 N.E.2d 517 (New York Court of Appeals, 1969)
MURRAY, ETC. v. Comptroller of Treasury
216 A.2d 897 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1966)
Sisters of the Holt Cross v. Town of Brookline
198 N.E.2d 624 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1964)
SISTERS OF HOLY CROSS OF MASSACHUSETTS v. Brookline
198 N.E.2d 624 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1964)