CTA Case No. 1856 (Decision)
.. ... 0 ' � �� ' 1 74
�l - t l5 �. i.,h t.o lnt s0 ' t1 t t c. n t8 t .n. ( � 4, ,rJ� "' )' 23, ' ' 279, ' .6 ' ... t u 51 .5 ip . - I. n. l -~ \ "'I. l!(L unlo eel 1 !( 1 I ' , �0 ' 2, � p. n lm� 78, c. .. '. r-c , }. e. t 1t t0 b I c Qt ' t � 1 t.. D ... 0 11 l .. tt too 1" .) � lr t l 17 5
- �l - ' . -~ � ( � P� I t 1. t .� '1 -� t ... 1.1 a t C.:~>. � 3t t ( � � !) .� ' .' �~ ) no. � � .. t t 1. � ) �f ' a), (c ( . ., .... !' 76 n1t , ' �'
� l 56 -- ..,. 'j . f t . L n. or r i ~nr; a loa. c � .) w ' P. � � 0 p n~ f t e (a) of 1 lo - t hi ~p! � At n e .Q 0 v. ( l, I �� ) l � l "'"). ir us "f p ,Q t - . a,_ il 77
f. 1 - ( 1 1 1 1 � � ' � ?'
�1 -- t can not � t / l ' r 1 li 79
�1 - 7- 1 n � 1� I Ct'kd!i�7 /L -I L� h ' 80
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.