Nix v. Hedden status of the cucumber, squash, pea, and bean. "Nix" has been cited in three Supreme Court decisions as a precedent for court interpretation of common meanings, especially dictionary definitions. ("Sonn v. Maggone," ; "Saltonstall v. Wiebusch & Hilger," ; and "Cadwalader v. Zeh," ). Additionally, in "JSG Trading Corp. v. Tray-Wrap, Inc.," 917 F.2d 75 (2d Cir. 1990), a case unrelated to "Nix" aside from the shared focus on tomatoes, a judge wrote the following paragraph citing the case: In 2005, supporters in the New Jersey legislature cited "Nix" as a basis for a bill designating the tomato as the
Investment Trust Companies (in liq) v HM Revenue and Customs could have rights under EU law, following "Danfoss" and "Reemtsma". There should be a direct remedy, but subject to limitation defences. These were "San Giorgio" claims, and there was no need to confine the claimant to "Francovich v Italy" damages. Investment Trust Companies (in liq) v HM Revenue and Customs Investment Trust Companies v HMRC [2012] EWHC 458 (Ch) is an English unjust enrichment law case, concerning to what extent enrichment of the defendant must be at the expense of the claimant. The Investment Trust Companies (ITC), closed end investment trusts who got investment management services from management companies, sued