Harold P. Dahlgren Et Al., Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. United States of America, Defendant-Appellant., 557 F.2d 456 (5th Cir. 1977)

Federal Circuits, 5th Cir. (August 12, 1977)

Docket number: 75-3263

Permanent Link: http://vlex.com/vid/harold-dahlgren-plaintiffs-appellees-38388610
Id. vLex: VLEX-38388610

Click here to download this article in graphic format (Acrobat Reader)

Document language

Request manual translation

Search in this document

Document options

Sponsored Ads:

RSS What's this?

Cited by:

Code of Federal Regulations - Title 48: Federal Acquisition Regulations System - 48 CFR 552.237-72 - Prohibition Regarding “Quasi-Military Armed Forces.”

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Cir. - Douglas A. Holmberg, Appellee, v. Rodney C. Morrisette and Mintex Corporation, a Minnesota Corporation, Appellants. Douglas A. Holmberg, Appellee, v. Rodney C. Morrisette and Mintex Corporation, a Minnesota Corporation, Appellants., 800 F.2d 205 (8th Cir. 1986)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Cir. - United States of America Ex Rel. David P. Weinberger, and David P. Weinberger, Esq., Individually, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. State of Florida, Defendant-Appellee., 615 F.2d 1370 (5th Cir. 1980)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Cir. - Southwestern Bell Telephone Company; Petitioner, Southern New England Telephone Company; Texas Office of Public Utility Counsel; United States Telephone Association; Ameritech Corporation; U S West, Inc.; Rural Telephone Coalition; Cincinnati Bell Telephone Company; Gte Service Corporation; Gte Alaska, Incorporated; Gte Arkansas Incorporated; Gte California, Incorporated; Gte Florida, Incorporated; Gte Midwest, Incorporated; Gte South, Incorporated; Gte Southwest, Incorporated; Gte North, Incorporated; Gte Hawaiian Telephone Company, Incorporated; Gte West Coast, Incorporated; Contel of Minnesota, Inc.; Contel of the South, Inc.; Missouri Public Service Commission; Gte Northwest, Incorporated; Pacific Bell; Nevada Bell, Intervenors on Appeal. v. Federal Communications Commission; United States of America, Respondents. Association for Local Telecommunications Services; American Telephone and Telegraph Company; Telecommunications Resellers Association; the Competition Policy Institute; Information ..., 153 F.3d 520 (8th Cir. 1998)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Cir. - United States of America, Ex Rel., Kathryn M. Milam, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Defendant-Appellant, and Charles B. Wilson; Laurence J. Marton; Dennis F. Deen; Burt G. Feurstein, Philip J. Tofilon; the Regents of the University of California; Brain Tumor Research Center; University of California, Defendants. United States of America, Amicus Curiae., 961 F.2d 46 (4th Cir. 1992)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Cir. - Coleman vs. Disabled Amer Vets (5th Cir. 1999)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Cir. - United States of America ex rel. Joseph T. Siewick, Appellant v. Jamieson Science and Engineering, Inc., et al.,Appellees, 214 F.3d 1372 (D.C. Cir. 2000)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Cir. - United States Ex Rel. James M. Thompson, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Columbia/Hca Healthcare Corporation, Et Al., Defendants-Appellees., 125 F.3d 899 (5th Cir. 1998)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Cir. - Iq Products Company, Plaintiff-Intervenor Defendant-Counter Claimant-Appellant, v. Pennzoil Products Company, Intervenor Plaintiff-Counter Defendant-Appellee, v. Pandora Manufacturing Incorporated, Also Known as Snap Products, Incorporated, Defendant-Appellee., 305 F.3d 368 (5th Cir. 2002)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Cir. - S. J. Groves & Sons Company, a Corporation, and Associated General Contractors of Illinois, an Incorporated Association, Et Al., Plaintiff-Appellees, v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen & Helpers of America, Local 627, an Unincorporated Association, Et Al., Defendants-Appellants., 581 F.2d 1241 (7th Cir. 1978)

See all citations to this document

Text:

Frank D. McCown, U.S. Atty., Fort Worth, Tex., Scott P. Crampton, Asst. Atty. Gen., Wm. A. Friedlander, Atty., Murray S. Horwitz, Atty., Tax Div., Gilbert E. Andrews, Chief, Appellate Sec., U.S. Dept. of Justice, Washington, D.C., Martha Joe Stroud, Asst. U.S. Atty., Dallas, Tex., for defendant-appellant.

John L. Hauer, Robert E. Goodfriend, Clarice M. Davis, Dallas, Tex., for plaintiffs-appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas.

Order on Petition for Clarification and Rehearing.

(Opinion June 3, 1977, 553 F.2d 434).

Before TUTTLE, WISDOM and COLEMAN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

It appears that one issue comprehended within the original suit, that is the question whether Dahlgren had "constructively transferred" his interest in the patent long before the purported sale with which this case is now concerned, was decided in favor of the taxpayer by the jury in response to special interrogatories. Petitioner contends that it is appropriate, if this Court remands the case to the trial court to provide that that issue is no longer to be tried and that the new trial shall be limited to the valuation question dealt with in our opinion. We conclude that this is an appropriate request and on remand the issue of possible transfer of the patent in May of 1959 shall be taken as settled in favor of the taxpayer and shall not again be submitted to the jury.

The petition for rehearing is DENIED.

Sponsored Ads:

Try vLex for FREE for 3 days

Access legal information from United States including:

Constitutions
Forms and Contracts
Legal Books and Journals
Case Law
News and Business
Regulations
U.S. Code

Try vLex without any commitment for 3 days and see why you need it.

3

days of Free Access

Home / United States /

Case Law

vlex /