Jacobson v. Hannifin

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding plaintiff did not have a constitutionally protected property interest in 15 a new gaming license, a necessary component of his business as a casino landlord, 16 because state law afforded the gaming commission wide discretion to deny such 17 licenses
• “This wide discretion resting with the Gaming 11 Commission negates Jacobson’s claim to a protectible property interest created by the 12 State.”
• “A property interest may be created if ‘procedural’ 22 STERLING V. FEEK requirements are intended to operate as a significant substantive restriction on the basis for an agency’s actions.”
• gaming license under Nevada law

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).