Commerce and Industry Ins. Co. v. Consolidated Capital Equities Corp.
Commerce and Industry Insurance Company v. Consolidated Capital Equities Corporation, Consolidated Capital Securities Corporation, Consolidated Capital Management Company, Consolidated Capital Income Trust, Consolidated Capital Special Trust
Opinion
878 F.2d 385
Commerce and Industry Insurance Company v. Consolidated Capital Equities Corporation, Consolidated Capital Securities Corporation, Consolidated Capital Management Company, Consolidated Capital Income Trust, Consolidated Capital Special Trust
NO. 87-15008
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
JUN 19, 1989 1
Appeal From: N.D.Cal.
2
AFFIRMED.
How later courts describe this case
Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 2 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.
-
(holding that there was no “substantially different evidence” that warranted application of exception to law of the case doctrine where the government’s purportedly new evidence advanced an argument that was “equally available to the government at the time of our prior appeal”)
-
(reviewing due process provided and ultimately affirming license revocation)
Cited by 9 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
- Interstate Fire & Casualty Company v. First Specialty Insurance Company
- People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, Inc. v. United States Department of Agriculture
- Knapp v. United States Department of Agriculture
- Sting Security, Inc. v. First Mercury Syndicate, Inc.
- H.E. Davis & Sons, Inc. v. North Pacific Insurance
- Chaudhary v. Immigration and Naturalization Service
Most recent
- Interstate Fire & Casualty Company v. First Specialty Insurance Company
- Allen Bernard Shay v. County of Los Angeles
- People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, Inc. v. United States Department of Agriculture
- Knapp v. United States Department of Agriculture
- Horton v. United States Department of Agriculture
- H.E. Davis & Sons, Inc. v. North Pacific Insurance
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.