Legal Opinion

Heyen v. United States

District Court, D. Kansas

Decided February 28, 1990No. 88-1574-CPublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

CROW, District Judge.

The case comes before the court on the plaintiff’s motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict (JNOV), or, in the alternative, for new trial. On February 2, 1990, the jury returned a verdict in favor of defendant on plaintiff’s refund claim and on defendant’s claim for fraudulent underpayment of gift taxes. Plaintiff contends the jury verdict must be set aside because jury instructions 16 and 17 were erroneous, the verdict is contrary to the evidence, and defendant’s counsel made a prejudicial misstatement of the facts in closing argument.…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Commissioner v. Court Holding Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1945
  2. Commissioner v. WemyssSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
  3. Dickman v. CommissionerSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  4. Robinette v. HelveringSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
  5. Candi Ryder v. The City of Topeka and Michael MeyerCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1987

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Mary Ann Heyen, of the Estate of Jennie Owen, Deceased v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1991
  2. Estate of True v. CommissionerCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2004
  3. Deters v. Equifax Credit Information Services, Inc.District Court, D. Kansas · 1997
  4. Baty v. Willamette Industries, Inc.District Court, D. Kansas · 1997
  5. Laughinghouse v. RisserDistrict Court, D. Kansas · 1992

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API