News

Tax

[03/09] Amazon cuts off Colo. affiliates because of tax
[03/08] Tax season bringing out the fraud artists
[03/08] H&R Block 3Q profit rises despite fewer returns
[03/04] House to vote on tax breaks for new hires

More...

White Collar Crime

[03/08] Tax season bringing out the fraud artists
[03/03] 10th guilty plea in Galleon insider trading case
[02/25] Former Madoff operations exec arrested
[02/24] 3 Google execs convicted of privacy violations

More...

Business

[03/09] Samsung, Panasonic start selling 3-D TVs
[03/09] Britain's trade deficit widens
[03/09] China passenger car sales up 55 percent in Feb
[03/09] Ford launches affordable made-for-India compact

More...

Case Summaries

Tax Law

[03/05] Mike v. Franchise Tax Bd.
In an action by the Franchise Tax Board (FTB) to collect income tax from petitioner, an American Indian, for receiving more than $385,000 as her per capita distribution from her tribe's gaming operations on their reservation, trial court's entry of judgment in favor of FTB is affirmed as, the State of California may impose income tax on income received by an enrolled member of a tribe from his or her tribe's reservation activities when that member resides on the reservation of a different tribe.

[03/04] New York v. Golden Feather Smoke Shop, Inc.
In defendants' appeal from a preliminary injunction prohibiting the sale of untaxed cigarettes other than to members of the Unkechauge Nation for their personal use, the Second Circuit certifies the following questions to the New York Court of Appeals: 1) Does N.Y. Tax Law section 471-e, either by itself or in combination with the provisions of section 471, impose a tax on cigarettes sold on Native American reservations when some or all of those cigarettes may be sold to persons other than members of the reservation's nation or tribe?; 2) If the answer to Question 1 is "no," does N.Y. Tax Law section 471 alone impose a tax on cigarettes sold on Native American reservations when some or all of those cigarettes may be sold to persons other than members of the reservation's nation or tribe?

[03/03] Byers v. Intuit, Inc.
In plaintiff's putative class action on behalf of U.S. taxpayers against the IRS and a consortium of companies in the electronic tax preparation and filing industry (FFA) claiming violations of the Independent Offices Appropriations Act (IOAA) in the charging of fees in exchange for providing e-filing services, as well as a violation of section 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act, dismissal of both claims is affirmed where: 1) the district court was correct in holding that the IOAA does not apply to the FFA members, as it only applies to a government agency and none of the exceptions in Thomas v. Network Solutions, Inc., 176 F.3d 500 (D.C. Cir. 1999) apply; and 2) the district court did not err in dismissing the Sherman Act claim as the FFA members are entitled to conduct-based implied antitrust immunity with respect to the anti-competitive action taken pursuant to the Ceiling Provisions of the 2005 Agreement with the IRS.

[02/26] US v. Bright
In defendants' appeal from the district court's order enforcing IRS summonses requiring production of documents, including those relating to offshore accounts, and finding defendants in contempt, the orders are affirmed in part where: 1) a taxpayer cannot refuse to produce a privilege log or documents for in camera review in response to an order to show cause and then protest an insufficient opportunity to present a claim of privilege; and 2) defendants were in contempt based on their failure to produce documents related to the two previously identified offshore accounts named in the summons. However, the order is modified where the district court's application of the foregone conclusion exception to records of two additional credit cards not named during the enforcement proceeding was clear error.

More...

White Collar Crime

[03/05] US v. Brown
Defendant's bank fraud conviction is affirmed where: 1) the extrinsic evidence of defendant's other uses of fictitious financial documents was substantively and temporally tied to the charged offenses, and those other uses were distinct enough not to be the "needless presentation of cumulative evidence" under Fed. R. Evid. 403; and 2) the extrinsic evidence that defendant had failed to pay for a house inspection was not probative of his intent to defraud the victim and therefore inadmissible under Rule 404(b), but this evidence was quite limited in length, not inflammatory, and was not mentioned during the government's closing arguments.

[02/23] US v. Brown
Former Chief Legal Counsel for Rite Aid's conviction and sentence for conspiracy to commit accounting fraud, filing false statements with the SEC, and other related crimes, is affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded where: 1) district court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendant's Rule 33 motion based on newly discovered evidence; 2) defendant's pre-trial suppression motion of the taped conversations was properly denied; 3) district court did not abuse its discretion in its reaction to defendant's plea agreement; and 4) defendant's sentence is vacated and remanded as the district court failed to explain, in the manner now required under Booker, how it considered the section 3553(a) factors in imposing the sentence.

[02/11] US v. Johnston
District court's resentencing of a defendant to 51 months' imprisonment and an order to pay restitution for the full amount of loss in excess of $6,600,000 for failing to pay $1 million in restitution by the deadline provided in a plea agreement for committing mail fraud is affirmed as the district court's willfulness finding was not clearly erroneous based on its findings evidencing defendant's deception and manipulation regarding his finances.

[02/02] US v. Speakman
In a wire fraud prosecution, the district court's restitution order is reversed and remanded where a remand was appropriate to allow the government to present evidence of the proximate cause of the loss to defendant's employer, which paid an arbitration award to the victim of defendant's fraud.

More...

Tax-exempt Organizations

[03/02] St. John's Well Child & Family Ctr. v. Schwarzenegger
In a petition for writ of mandate by a nonprofit network of five community health centers and six school-based clinics in medically underserved areas of the state, claiming that Governor Schwarzenegger's use of his line-item veto authority exceeded constitutional limits because individual budget cuts he further reduced were not items of appropriation that could be individually vetoed or reduced, the petition is denied as the particular Assembly Bill 4X 1 budget reductions at issue were "items of appropriation" within the meaning of article IV, section 10(e) of the state constitution and the governor's line-item vetoes reducing them, while approving other portions of the Bill, were constitutionally authorized.

[02/22] Thiara v. Pac. Coast Khalsa Diwan Society
In proceedings seeking a petition for writ of mandate to compel a nonprofit religious corporation and its officers to permit five of its members to inspect the corporation's membership list, books, and records, based on the claim that they were members of the corporation, grant of the writ with conditions is reversed and remanded where defendant's notice of appeal was filed timely on July 17, 2008 as the plaintiffs did not serve any document on the defendants that commenced the running of the 60-day period under rule 8.104(a)(2), and because neither the court clerk nor a party served a document that complied with rule 8.104(a)(1) or (2), defendants were required to file their notice of appeal within 180 days after entry of judgment.

[01/20] UPMC-Braddock Hosp. v. Sebelius
In an action arising from a denial of a reimbursement claim for loss on depreciable assets resulting from a merger between two non-profit medical corporations, summary judgment in favor of the Secretary of the United States Department of Health and Human Services is vacated and remanded where: 1) the Secretary's interpretation of the related party regulations, requiring examination of whether the parties were related pre- and post-merger, is contrary to the plain language of the regulations, and under the proper, pre-merger test, the parties were not related at the time of the transaction; and 2) the district court's determination that the merger was not a bona fide sale was not based on substantial evidence, in light of errors made in determining the value of certain assets.

[12/30] World Outreach Conference Center v. City of Chicago
In a consolidated case involving the rights of religious organizations to avoid having to comply with local land-use regulations, dismissal of the suits is affirmed in part and reversed in part where: 1) the district court erred in dismissing World Outreach's substantial-burden claim under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act, as the burden imposed on a small religious organization catering to the poor was substantial and there was no possible justification for it; 2) a deliberate, irrational discrimination, even if it is against one person rather than a group, is actionable under the equal protection clause, and as this claim is supported by the allegations of Outreach's complaint, it should not have been dismissed; 3) World Outreach's claim for damages for violation of the Chicago Zoning Ordinance is barred by the state's tort immunity act and therefore was properly dismissed; 4) dismissal of Trinity Evangelical Lutheran Church's claim is affirmed as the burden imposed on Trinity, a substantial religious organization, by the landmark designation that disables it from demolishing the apartment house is modest as the building has not been rendered uninhabitable by the designation.

More...