How cited: Matter of Val. Proc., Rail Reorg. Act · Go Syfert

Matter of Val. Proc., Rail Reorg. Act (1976)

green · 40 citation events across 4 courts. Showing the 9 strongest citers on record (one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
Treatment trajectory · 1976 → 2026 · click a year to view the case as of then
197620012026
But See · 7th Cir. · signal: but cf.
Cf. United States v. Miller, supra, 317 U.S. at 375 , 63 S.Ct. at 280 ; In re Valuation Proceedings, supra, 531 F.Supp. at 1324-33 ; In re Valuation *670 Proceedings, supra, 445 F.Supp. at 1040-41 ; but cf. In re Valuation Proceedings, Etc., Regional Rail Reorganization, 425 F.Supp. 266, 273 (Sp.Ct.R.R.R.A.1976).
Rule Authority · Regl. Rail Reorg. Act · 14 citations in this opinion
In accordance with our Memorandum of June 16, 1976, 425 F.Supp. at 289, opening briefs on the issues of NLV, CMV, and certain other matters were received on January 6, an answering brief of the Government parties on February 20, and reply briefs on March 18, 1977.
Rule Authority · Regl. Rail Reorg. Act · 2 citations in this opinion
In the October 18, 1976 opinion we said, to much the same effect, 425 F.Supp. at 269 (footnote omitted): Here again most of the parties share our inability to discern why, under the terms of the Rail Act, the requirement that we find that the consideration is more than, less than, or equal to the “constitutional minimum” does not drain the “fair and equitable” language of all meaning as regards the adequacy of the total consideration to be received by each transferor. 2 In o…
footnote omitted
Rule Authority · Regl. Rail Reorg. Act
In re Valuation Proceedings, 425 F.Supp. 266, 276 (Sp.Ct.
Rule Authority · Regl. Rail Reorg. Act
We had first established the deadline as December 1, 1976, see In re Valuation Proceedings, 425 F.Supp. 266, 269 (Sp.Ct.R.R.R.A.1976) and then extended it to May 1, 1977 (Sp.Ct.
Rule Authority · Regl. Rail Reorg. Act
In the June 16 Memorandum we requested the parties to brief the question "whether the standard of valuation should be different if the Act be regarded as a reorganization statute, as an eminent domain statute or as both." 425 F.Supp. at 280 (footnote omitted).
footnote omitted
Cited (see also) · 3rd Cir. · signal: see also
See also In the Matter of Valuation Proceedings Under Sections 303(c) and 306 of the Regional Rail Reorganization Act, 425 F.Supp. 266 , 276 (Special Court, 1976).
Cited (see also) · D.N.J. · signal: see also
See also In the Matter of the Valuation Proceedings Under Sections 303(c) and 306 of the Regional Rail Reorganization Act, 425 F.Supp. 266 , 276 (Special Court 1976).
Cited · Regl. Rail Reorg. Act · signal: see
See In the Matter of the Valuation Proceedings, 425 F.Supp. 266, 282 ; CMV Opinion, 445 F.Supp. 994, 1004 .