CTA Case No. 4079 (Resolution)
�ti~pBL~ 0,. ~t ,..~llli"'Pl~ t::OURT OP TA 1\ ~\I'P�ALB-.. Q\...-...~4 CitY n: GOET COR v ATiv 1 P~t.itio.er, - v r:.o.ue - C ... A. Cl.$ 0. 40/9 C M!SS r.o wl-. � lb!T E. Al. REV � '!JE, a~ vcr.d nt. � - ~~� � � � � ~~- X It � 0 L t l 0 Act.~. t.h � ot1on To Cancel Ae~ess~e1 And it.. ra.w y D t.l ti n r on tlov aL or l C , l 81 Oil t. .�rou. d the t t. � sent r r o 1c ency � co H-' tax end det� c 1ency 1 t. � iOlo.l.ne; a onguet C rpo t1 n, 1 loc Chro 1 to ~rt 0. d nc., t.ir.. t 8 and t.-A tok Con t rae: p ratio� s invol v !d n, J.r ady en t � b 1n n� o ec io c t 1 pat� or reapon t t o .. � l t. t. e � � t n to r vi wl.t .ur n 1 ca e con ld~rod lo d an C t � � .� t rQ Man 1 � Oec:ct b .,. � 19� 1. A. f1 (on or 1c1 1 l av Pre CO 'JA'T.,. c. OA ll J Aa:socl t Jud e 426
Want an analysis of this document?
Ask ASG Legal AI to summarize it, compare it with other rulings, or explain how it applies to your situation — it researches from this same library.