Feminist scholars rewrite major tax decisions in order to illustrate the key role of viewpoint in statutory interpretation.Hinweis: Dieser Artikel kann nur an eine deutsche Lieferadresse ausgeliefert werden.
Part I. Introduction and Overview: 1. Introduction to the Feminist Judgments: Rewritten Tax Opinions Project Bridget J. Crawford and Anthony C. Infanti; 2. Feminist judging for substantive gender equality in tax law: changing international and comparative constitutional contexts Kathleen A. Lahey; Part II. The Feminist Judgments: 3. United States v. Rickert 188 US 432 (1903) Chloe Thompson and Grant Christensen; 4. Lucas v. Earl 281 U.S. 111 (1930) Francine J. Lipman and Ann Murphy; 5. Welch v. Helvering 290 US 111 (1933) Nicole Appleberry and Mary Louise Fellows; 6. United States v. Davis 370 US 65 (1962) Linda M. Beale and Patricia A. Cain; 7. Bob Jones University v. United States 461 US 574 (1983) Elaine Waterhouse Wilson and David A. Brennen; 8. Manufacturers Hanover Trust Co. v. United States 75 F.2d 459 (2d Cir. 1985) Mildred Wigfall Robinson and Mary L. Heen; 9. Estate of Clack 106 T.C. 131 (1996) Goldburn P. Maynard Jr and Wendy C. Gerzog; 10. Cheshire v. Commissioner 115 T.C. 183 (2000) aff'd 282 F.3d 326 (5th Cir. 2002) Michelle L. Drumbl and Danshera Cords; 11. Magdalin v. Commissioner 96 T.C.M. (CCH) 491 (2008) aff'd 2010-1 US Tax Cas. (CCH) 50 150 (1st Cir. 2009) Katherine Pratt and Jennifer Bird-Pollan; 12. O'Donnabhain v. Commissioner 134 T.C. 34 (2010) acq. 2011-47 I.R.B. 789 (Nov. 21 2011) Nancy J. Knauer and David B. Cruz; 13. United States v. Windsor 133 S. Ct. 2675 (2013) Allison Anna Tait and Ruthann Robson.
Part I. Introduction and Overview: 1. Introduction to the Feminist Judgments: Rewritten Tax Opinions Project Bridget J. Crawford and Anthony C. Infanti; 2. Feminist judging for substantive gender equality in tax law: changing international and comparative constitutional contexts Kathleen A. Lahey; Part II. The Feminist Judgments: 3. United States v. Rickert 188 US 432 (1903) Chloe Thompson and Grant Christensen; 4. Lucas v. Earl 281 U.S. 111 (1930) Francine J. Lipman and Ann Murphy; 5. Welch v. Helvering 290 US 111 (1933) Nicole Appleberry and Mary Louise Fellows; 6. United States v. Davis 370 US 65 (1962) Linda M. Beale and Patricia A. Cain; 7. Bob Jones University v. United States 461 US 574 (1983) Elaine Waterhouse Wilson and David A. Brennen; 8. Manufacturers Hanover Trust Co. v. United States 75 F.2d 459 (2d Cir. 1985) Mildred Wigfall Robinson and Mary L. Heen; 9. Estate of Clack 106 T.C. 131 (1996) Goldburn P. Maynard Jr and Wendy C. Gerzog; 10. Cheshire v. Commissioner 115 T.C. 183 (2000) aff'd 282 F.3d 326 (5th Cir. 2002) Michelle L. Drumbl and Danshera Cords; 11. Magdalin v. Commissioner 96 T.C.M. (CCH) 491 (2008) aff'd 2010-1 US Tax Cas. (CCH) 50 150 (1st Cir. 2009) Katherine Pratt and Jennifer Bird-Pollan; 12. O'Donnabhain v. Commissioner 134 T.C. 34 (2010) acq. 2011-47 I.R.B. 789 (Nov. 21 2011) Nancy J. Knauer and David B. Cruz; 13. United States v. Windsor 133 S. Ct. 2675 (2013) Allison Anna Tait and Ruthann Robson.
Es gelten unsere Allgemeinen Geschäftsbedingungen: www.buecher.de/agb
Impressum
www.buecher.de ist ein Internetauftritt der buecher.de internetstores GmbH
Geschäftsführung: Monica Sawhney | Roland Kölbl | Günter Hilger
Sitz der Gesellschaft: Batheyer Straße 115 - 117, 58099 Hagen
Postanschrift: Bürgermeister-Wegele-Str. 12, 86167 Augsburg
Amtsgericht Hagen HRB 13257
Steuernummer: 321/5800/1497
![Review of the Judgments of the Supreme Court in the Queen Vs. Joseph Chasson [microform]](https://bilder.buecher.de/produkte/66/66195/66195925m.jpg "Review of the Judgments of the Supreme Court in the Queen Vs. Joseph Chasson [microform]")
