holding that because state imposed substantial restrictions on state trooper's lunch arrangements, lunch expenses were deductible as "ordinary and necessary" business expenses under general provisions of § 162
Summary of this case from Putnam v. U.S.No. 88-1032.
February 21, 1989, October TERM, 1983.
C.A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 860 F. 2d 50.
holding that because state imposed substantial restrictions on state trooper's lunch arrangements, lunch expenses were deductible as "ordinary and necessary" business expenses under general provisions of § 162
Summary of this case from Putnam v. U.S.standing merely requires the party to make allegations of a colorable claim of injury to an interest which is arguably protected or regulated by the statute or constitutional guarantee
Summary of this case from Cambodian Buddhist v. Planning Zoning Commstanding merely requires the party to make allegations of a colorable claim of injury to an interest which is arguably protected or regulated by the statute or constitutional guarantee
Summary of this case from Bongiorno Supermarket v. Zoning Bd. of App., Stamfordstanding merely requires the party to make allegations of a colorable claim of injury to an interest which is arguably protected or regulated by the statute or constitutional guarantee
Summary of this case from Med-Trans, Inc. v. Department of Public Healthstanding "merely requires the party to make allegations of a colorable claim of injury to an interest which is arguably protected or regulated by the statute or constitutional guarantee"
Summary of this case from United Cable Television Serv. v. Dept. of Pub. UtilFull title:JUTKOFSKY v. MAESTRI ET AL
Court:U.S.
Date published: Feb 21, 1989
A defendant claiming an exemption under 33 U.S.C. § 1344(f), bears the burden of proving that its activities…
Tapogna v. EganFor purposes of a motion to dismiss, I take the material allegations of the complaint as true. Lessler v.…