Posts

Tax-Exempt Bonds: The Third Circuit Court of Appeals held, in IRS v. DeNaples, that Internal Revenue Code Section 103 provided an exemption from federal income tax to interest payments paid under an installment agreement by the State to Taxpayers. Taxpayers Dominick and Louis DeNaples were both partners in several entities that owned an interest in parcels of real property in Pennsylvania. The land was acquired by the State to build the Lackawana Valley Industrial Highway through condemnation and in 2001, the Taxpayers entered into an agreement whereby the state would pay them $40....

Collins “Collie” Christensen Sr. probably feels like he got a bad deal, like he got ripped off. We suppose that’s how his victims felt. The former Sacramento socialite pled guilty in 2011 to ripping off investors and collecting $2.39 million in funds – $985,994 of which were misappropriated and $507,805 of which were used on personal expenses, such as his $13,000-per-month mortgage, his daughter’s college tuition, and gambling in Biloxi, Mississippi....

Sorry, dog people. Cats are awesome. No further discussion needed. But one thing cat owners can agree on is that it’s never awesome to watch our ferocious felines dig their claws into our furniture. “I just bought that couch! What are you doing? Come on!” For decades, many U.S. families decided the best way to save their furniture – and their legs, arms, and faces – was to have their cats declawed....

In six black produce clerks’ employment discrimination suit on racial grounds against their employer alleging that the company classified two white women as produce clerks without proper notice that it would have enabled the plaintiffs to claim hours from the women because of their seniority, district court’s dismissal of the suit is affirmed as, defendant presented evidence that it was an innocent mistake and plaintiffs presented no rebuttal nor evidence of damages....

This week, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals entertained an interlocutory appeal stemming from a Video Privacy Protection Act (VPPA) lawsuit. No, movie rental is not the booming business it once was, thanks to online streaming services, but the VPPA – a federal law that keeps your video/DVD rental history private – is still being used in class action lawsuits. A video provider who knowingly discloses a viewer’s personally identifiable information is liable to the aggrieved person for damages....

Beware the Ides of March, Judge Rakoff. The Second Circuit Court of Appeals announced Thursday that it will delay the SEC-Citigroup civil fraud trial, finding that the litigants are likely to prevail in their settlement appeal, reports The Wall Street Journal. District Court Judge Jed Rakoff had previously scheduled the trial to begin in July. Judge Rakoff blocked a $285 million settlement between the SEC and Citigroup in November, calling the sum “pocket change” and claiming that Citigroup should admit fault in the settlement....

In a dormant Commerce Clause challenge to a toll policy of the New York Thruway Authority (NYTA) that afforded a discount to residents of a particular city in New York and denied the same benefit to all other New Yorkers and to all nonresidents of New York, dismissal of the complaint is affirmed in part where the Privileges and Immunities Clause of Article IV of the Constitution does not apply to foreign citizens....

Request for attorney’s fees for improper removal State of Ohio v. Brunner, 09-4282, concerned a challenge to the district court’s denial of relators’ request for attorney’s fees for improperly trying to remove the case, in a suit involving a ballot-counting dispute arising from 2008 county elections. In affirming, the court held that the district court judge not only thought the removal was objectionably reasonable, but he also denied the motion to remand the case to state court....

Sometimes criminal defense lawyers are asked to represent clients they don’t believe in. While you can’t always pick and choose your clients, you can sometimes turn down representation. It’s not always easy, though. Take a recent Second Circuit Court of Appeals case. A defense attorney representing a client in a child sex abuse case decided to withdraw right before the trial. The case, U.S. v Linda O’Connor and Dean Sacco, shows the reality of criminal defense and particularly, how emotionally conflicting it can sometimes be for a criminal defense attorney to represent a client in cases that may seem reprehensible, such as child abuse cases or in this case, a child sex-abuse case....

Dodd v. US, No. 09-3345, involved defendant’s appeal from the dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. section 2255 motion for post-conviction relief as untimely. The court of appeals affirmed in part on the ground that most of the claims in defendant’s amended motion did not arise from the same operative facts as the allegations made in the original motion. However, the court reversed in part on the ground that the fact that defendant’s amended motion identified the legal basis of the objectionable nature of certain testimony as being too speculative did not change its factual similarity to defendant’s original motion....

In an ERISA action seeking an order directing a benefit plan to treat plaintiff as a designated surviving spouse beneficiary, summary judgment for plaintiff is reversed where the plan administrator’s interpretation denying her that status was not an abuse of discretion. Read Sznewajs v. U.S. Bancorp Amended & Restated Supp. Benefits Plan, No. 07-16489 Appellate Information Argued and Submitted October 23, 2008 Filed July 13, 2009 Judges Opinion by Judge Clifton...

District court’s conviction of defendant for bank robbery and imposition of a 65 months’ imprisonment is affirmed where: 1) Rule 12(e) applies to identification testimony in court; 2) defendant cannot supply good cause for the purpose of Rule 12(e); and 3) a motion under section 2255 is the right way to obtain review of contentions that an attorney’s carelessness causes a waiver under Rule 12(e), but the record on direct appeal lacks the evidence needed to make such a decision....

District court’s imposition of a sentence of 262 months’ imprisonment followed by six years of supervised release on a defendant convicted of possession and sale of crack cocaine within 1000 feet of a public school is affirmed in part and reversed in part and remanded where: 1) the government has not met its burden of showing that an error by the district court was harmless because it cannot be concluded that the court would have imposed the same sentence had it known that the career offender Guidelines were advisory; and 2) a denial of defendant’s motion for a reduced sentence is affirmed as his career offender status disqualified him from receiving a reduced sentence under Guidelines Amendment 706 for crack cocaine offenses under Guideline 2D1....

Methamphetamine Conviction Affirmed In US v. Hantzis, No. 05-50507, the court affirmed defendant’s conviction and sentence for possessing with the intent to distribute, and distributing, at least fifty grams of methamphetamine, holding that 1) the district court conducted an adequate Faretta colloquy and defendant knowingly and intelligently waived his right to counsel; 2) the district court was not required to engage in additional Faretta colloquies at the subsequent evidentiary hearing or at sentencing in defendant’s case because no significant changes in circumstance occurred; and 3) the district court did not err in declining to appoint new counsel for counsel for defendant at his sentencing....

In a prosecution for bank fraud and tax evasion, district court’s exclusion of defense evidence on the ground that defendant failed to comply with the reciprocal discovery requirement of Fed. R. Crim. P. 16(c) is affirmed as the district court did not err in excluding the evidence, but even if the court did err, it was harmless error because the excluded evidence would not have created reasonable doubt. Read US v....

MDMA Convictions Affirmed In US v. Mayo, No. 10-1752, the court affirmed defendants’ convictions for possession with intent to distribute and aiding and abetting the possession with intent to distribute MDMA, where 1) the officer who searched defendants’ vehicle had probable cause to believe drug contraband would be found in the minivan when he searched it; 2) the district court did not clearly err in finding that the officers’ search of the minivan did not exceed the scope of defendant’s consent; and 3) defendant waived certain issues by failing to include them in his motion to suppress....

District court’s conviction of defendant for drug related crimes is affirmed where: 1) evidence was sufficient to prove that defendant possessed the rifle in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime; and 2) defendant’s admissions regarding the amount of drugs were sufficient to support the district court’s relevant conduct findings. Read US v. Vaughn, No. 08-4169 Appellate Information Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana, South Bend Division...

The U.S. government takes the civil institution of marriage seriously and couples must meet established criteria before their marriage is considered legitimate by federal, state, and local governments. What factors, then, can make a marriage invalid? It Depends. A lot of marriage laws are decided on the state level, which means that the definition of a “valid" marriage depends largely on where the couple lives. For example, in Colorado, a marriage may be annulled if one of the parties involved entered into the marriage as a “jest or dare....

Citizens United has been vilified by the media over the yeas as the case that encapsulated the infamous “money equals speech” mantra, a statement that has been postered as the cynical influence of shadowy money influencing politics. Well, the much skimmed over dicta of the case just got a shot in the arm by the Tenth Circuit. According to the circuit, the public has an “informational interests” ala Citizens that requires disclosure of donors that pay for ads that even mention candidates in the days leading up to an election....

Chief Justice John Roberts has referred the complaints filed in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals against the rookie SCOTUS Justice Brett Kavanaugh to the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals. Notably, the complaints against Kavanaugh were filed after his nomination and do not involve his conduct while serving the D.C. Circuit bench. Nevertheless, the D.C. Circuit Court Justice tasked with conducting the investigation into the complaints requested that the matter be handled by a justice outside the D....