Friedman Vs. New York

Friedman vs New York

Type Court Judgment Court US Supreme Court Decided Mar-23-1970

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/102599

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/102599
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided On: Mar-23-1970
Case Number: 397 U.S. 317
Subject: Direct Taxation

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Direct Taxation

Key legal issue: Direct Taxation

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Friedman

Respondent

New York

Excerpt

friedman v. new york - 397 u.s. 317 (1970) u.s. supreme court friedman v. new york, 397 u.s. 317 (1970) 397 u.s. 317 friedman v. new york appeal from the court of appeals of new york no. 1137. decided march 23, 1970 24 n. y. 2d 528, 249 n. e. 2d 369, appeal dismissed. marx leva, alexander b. hawes, and richard e. nolan for appellant. louis j. lefkowitz, attorney general of new york, ruth kessler toch, solicitor general, and jeremiah jochnowitz, assistant attorney general, for appellee. per curiam. the motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.

Full Judgment

FRIEDMAN v. NEW YORK - 397 U.S. 317 (1970)
U.S. Supreme Court FRIEDMAN v. NEW YORK, 397 U.S. 317 (1970) 397 U.S. 317

FRIEDMAN v. NEW YORK
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW YORK
No. 1137.
Decided March 23, 1970

24 N. Y. 2d 528, 249 N. E. 2d 369, appeal dismissed.

Marx Leva, Alexander B. Hawes, and Richard E. Nolan for appellant.

Louis J. Lefkowitz, Attorney General of New York, Ruth Kessler Toch, Solicitor General, and Jeremiah Jochnowitz, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.

Same Court & Year US Supreme Court · 1970 Same Parties Friedman vs New York Same Subject Direct Taxation