United States v. McGurn

How courts have described this case

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

• “We emphasize that a liquor license is not like other ‘general intangibles’ because it is issued as a matter of privilege, not as a matter of right, by the government, and the government has total control of its use”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

7 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Walling Enterprises, Inc. v. Mathias
  Supreme Court of Florida· 1994-03-31· cited 9×
• FLANIGAN'S ENTERPRISES v. Barnett Bank
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1993-03-05· cited 6×
• Mathias v. Walling Enterprises, Inc.
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1992-12-31· cited 4×
• Dery v. OCCHIUZZO AND OCCHIUZZO ENTERPRISES, INC.
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2000-11-29· cited 2×
• VMI Entertainment, LLC, a Florida etc. v. Westwood Plaza, LLC, GM etc.
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2014-09-22· cited 1×
• McGurn v. Whiskey Creek, Inc.
  Eleventh Circuit· 1992-07-01· cited 1×
• Prime Shoppes Partners v. PFO Enterprises, Inc.
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1992-04-24

Cites

3 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• In Re Coed Shop, Inc.
  N.D. Florida· 1977-05-20· cited 20×
• In Re Seville Entertainment Complex of Pensacola, Inc.
  N.D. Florida· 1987-08-31· cited 4×
• McGurn v. Whiskey Creek, Inc.
  Eleventh Circuit· 1991-02-07· cited 3×