Legal Opinion
United States v. Jones
District Court, D. New Jersey
Decided February 23, 1995No. Civ. A. 92-1563 (SSB)PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
BROTMAN, District Judge:
Presently before the court is the motion of plaintiff, United States government, for summary judgment. For the reasons set forth below, the government's motion is granted in part and denied in part.
I. Factual and Procedural Background
The facts in the present matter are uncontested as they have been stipulated to by all parties. The uneontested facts are reproduced below in the same format that they appear in the Joint Final Pretrial Order entered in this matter on September 2, 1994.
1. Defendants Harry Jones and Janet Jones are married and reside at the Sherman…
2Cases cited45 opinions
- Aquilino v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1960
- Brushaber v. Union Pacific RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1916
- Morgan v. CommissionerSupreme Court of the United States · 1940
- United States v. RodgersSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- United States v. National Bank of CommerceSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
40 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Securities & Exchange Commission v. AntarDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 2000
- United States v. KlimekDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1997
- Daneman v. Stanley (In Re Stanley)United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Ohio · 2008
- Amoco Production Co. v. Aspen GroupDistrict Court, D. Colorado · 1998
- Matter of RosemillerUnited States Bankruptcy Court, D. New Jersey · 1995
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.