The following excerpt is from Fourth Inv. LP v. United States, D.C. No. 3:08-cv-00100-BTM-BLM, D.C. No. 3:08-cv-00110-BTM-BLM, No. 11-56997, No. 11-57009 (9th Cir. 2013):
5. We have not previously provided precedential guidance on this issue, and two of our unpublished dispositions appear to be inconsistent with one another. Compare Adam v. United States, 400 F. App'x 175, 176 (9th Cir. 2010) (the district court must look to state law in evaluating nominee status); with United States v. Wheeler, 403 F. App'x 301, 302 (9th Cir. 2010) (affirming the application of federal law to determine nominee relationship without reference to state's nominee doctrine).
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.