§

In re Appeal of Phila. & Reading Relief Ass'n

4 B.T.A. 713 (B.T.A. 1926)
In re Appeal of Phila. & Reading Relief Ass'n

5 Cited authorities

  1. United Mine Workers v. Coronado Co.

    259 U.S. 344 (1922)   Cited 411 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that labor union could be sued for antitrust violations and describing the "affirmative legal recognition of their existence and usefulness and provisions for their protection"

  2. Ould v. Washington Hospital

    95 U.S. 303 (1877)   Cited 129 times
    In Ould, there was a recommendation to the trustees to select an institution which "shall not be under the control of any one religious sect or persuasion."

  3. Mutual Benefit Life Ins. Co. v. Duffy

    3 F.2d 1020 (3d Cir. 1925)   Cited 1 times

    No. 3182. March 2, 1925. In Error to the District Court of the United States for the District of New Jersey; John Rellstab, Judge. Newton K. Fox, of Washington, D.C., for plaintiff in error. John O.H. Pitney, John R. Hardin, David Kay, Jr., and Jay Ten Eyck, all of Newark, N.J., for defendant in error. Before BUFFINGTON, WOOLLEY, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM. The collector of internal revenue for the Fifth district of New Jersey assessed upon the plaintiff a war excess profits tax of $83

  4. Village of Haverstraw v. Eckerson

    124 A.D. 18 (N.Y. App. Div. 1908)   Cited 4 times

    January 24, 1908. Henry Bacon [ Ralph E. Prime with him on the brief], for the appellants. Alonzo Wheeler [ William McCauley with him on the brief], for the respondent. WOODWARD, J.: There are two appeals argued together, but it does not seem to be necessary to give any special consideration to the matters urged against the order continuing the temporary injunction, for if the plaintiff is entitled to the relief which the complaint demands, and we are disposed to so hold upon the demurrer, there

  5. Pratt v. Roman Catholic Orphan Asylum

    20 App. Div. 352 (N.Y. App. Div. 1897)   Cited 5 times

    August Term, 1897. Edward J. McGean, for the appellants. T.F. Haskell, for the respondent. RUMSEY, J.: The action was brought for the construction of the will of William C. Herring, deceased, by which bequests were made for charitable purposes to certain organizations, some incorporated and some unincorporated. Several of the bequests were held good at the Special Term, and as to those no question is raised upon this appeal. Those of the appellants whose bequests were held to be invalid dispute the