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
Pape v Commissioner of Taxation Pape v Commissioner of Taxation Pape v Commissioner of Taxation is an Australian court case concerning the constitutional validity of the "Tax Bonus for Working Australians Act (No 2) 2009" (Cth) which seeks to give one-off payments of up to $900 to Australian taxpayers. The decision of the High Court of Australia was announced on 3 April 2009, with reasons to follow later. The plaintiff in the case, Bryan Pape, was a law lecturer and barrister who represented himself before the Court. He challenged the legislation on the ground that the payments, said to be a tax bonus, were actually