Case: M.Caratan V. Commissioner (71-1 USTC ¶9353) ISSUE: whether the employee-taxpayers were entitled to exclude from their gross incomes the value of lodging furnished to them by their employer‚ M. Caratan‚ Inc.‚ under section 119 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954. FACTS: The company‚ M. Caratan‚ Inc‚had a policy‚ established by the taxpayers in their capacity as corporate officers and directors‚ that required supervisory and management personnel to reside on the farm. Company-owned lodging
Premium Corporation Taxation in the United States Tax
Defendant’s Argument: Mr. Chief Justice and may it please the court: The issue is this case is whether a public school district may regulate indecent speech in a public school setting. The facts of this case are that on April 26th‚ 1983‚ Matt Fraser‚ a 17 year old high school senior‚ gave a speech in front of the student body. Fraser’s speech was to introduce his candidate for vice president’s position of the student body. His speech contained references to sexual innuendo when compare the candidates
Premium High school Education Supreme Court of the United States
person is required to received in the workplace. The code has the ability to allow and disallow certain charges based on discrimination due to the nature of the job. As these following cases will illustrate‚ the Human Rights Code is not a piece of legislation that favors neither the individual nor the employer. These cases show how the Human Rights code is used to protect against discrimination in relation the health and safety‚ with special consideration on who is and is not eligible for compensation
Premium Human rights Law Occupational safety and health
Cipla v Roche – Generics Industry Rejoices! For the last two years‚ the Delhi High Court has been the battle ground for a pharmaceutical war between Roche and Cipla over Roche’s patent for the anticancer drug ‘erlotinib’‚ sold by Roche as ’Tarceva’. On 24 April 2009‚ the Division bench of the Delhi High Court dismissed Roche’s appeal against the refusal of a single judge to grant an injunction restraining Cipla from manufacturing‚ offering for sale‚ selling and exporting its generic version of ‘erlotinib’
Premium Patent application Patent Patentability
The doctor believes that providing treatment for Martin as soon as possible is best thing to do since the doctor catches the bladder cancer early before it spreads to other body parts‚ and cause more damage. As soon as Martin agrees and the doctor starts the procedure‚ the better chance Martin has of living a full life. Martin refuse to listen to anything the doctor and other health care team have to say. He clearly made his mind that the doctor has no idea what he is talking about and denying treatment
Premium Patient Physician Medicine
due to an existing standard of racial oppression. One of the difficulties regarding the Plessy vs. Ferguson case was the fact that southern whites were still not willing to view African Americans as equals because it threatened their belief
Premium United States Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution American Civil War
Case Brief By: Ashley Tam R. v. Martineau (1991)‚ 58 C.C.C. (3d) 353 (S.C.C.) Facts: The appellant‚ Martineau‚ was convicted of second-degree murder under s. 213(a) and (d) of the Criminal Code but the decision was overturned by the Alberta Court of Appeal who concluded that s. 213(a) violated ss. 7 and 11(d) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and could no longer be in effect. The issue was brought before the Supreme Court of Canada whether or not the appeal court was correct in
Premium Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Abortion Canada
Hopkins v. Price Waterhouse (1987) case. In this particular case‚ a female employee of a management firm filed a claim of sex discrimination against her employer. The plaintiff alleged that she was denied partnership with the company for acting “too masculine.” The employer reportedly informed the plaintiff that she may receive reconsideration the following year and she should focus on “walking‚ talking‚ and dressing more feminine” to progress her chances of becoming a partner (Hopkins v. Price Waterhouse
Premium Gender Discrimination Employment
U.S. Supreme Court TEXAS v. JOHNSON‚ 491 U.S. 397 (1989) 491 U.S. 397 Citation: Johnson was convicted of desecration of a venerated object in violation of a Texas statute. Date Decided: June 21‚ 1989 Facts of case: At the 1984 Republican National Convention in Dallas‚ Texas‚ Johnson decided to burn an American flag in protest of some policies made by the Reagan administration and some Dallas corporations that he did not agree with. Noone sustained physical injury or was even
Premium First Amendment to the United States Constitution Supreme Court of the United States United States
Title of Case: Florida v. Michael A. Riley Legal Citation: 488 U.S. 445‚ 109 S.Ct. 693‚ 102 L.Ed.2d. 835 (1989) Procedural History: The respondent‚ Michael A. Riley‚ was charged with possession of marijuana under Florida law. The trail court granted his motion to suppress; the Court of Appeals reversed but certified the case to the Florida Supreme Court‚ which rejected the decision of the Court of Appeals and reinstated the trail court’s suppression order. The Supreme Court granted a writ of certiorari
Premium Supreme Court of the United States Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution