Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The Court also rejected the premise that there is a bright line as to what constitutes a gift for taxation purposes. Id at 287. Instead, when determining whether something is a gift for taxation purposes, the critical consideration is the transferor's intention. Duberstein at 285-286 (citing Bogardus v. Commissioner, 302 U.S. 34 (1937)). This ...
The Democratic lawmakers had made their request concerning Thomas, a member of the Supreme Court's 6-3 conservative majority, in an April 2023 letter following reports by ProPublica and others ...
The code was issued during a time when the court faced great criticism, especially around the conduct of justice Clarence Thomas.It was shown that he received undisclosed gifts of luxury travel [2] and that he was involved with cases that were related to the political activities of his wife, Ginni Thomas, who worked to overturn the 2020 election results in the weeks leading up to the January 6 ...
Maryland, the Supreme Court held that the prosecution must disclose all exculpatory evidence to the defense. The only requirements being that the evidence is favorable to the defendant and material. [1]: 4 Thirteen years later, the Supreme Court defined what it meant for evidence to be material in a case called United States v
The Supreme Court on Wednesday struck down part of a federal anti-corruption law that makes it a crime for state and local officials to take gifts valued at more than $5,000 from a donor who had ...
The disturbing news of a death in a home can give some potential buyers the jitters, and eight states have laws that compel sellers to disclose a death on the property, per the analysis.
Goldberg v. Kelly, 397 U.S. 254 (1970), is a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution requires an evidentiary hearing before a recipient of certain government welfare benefits can be deprived of such benefits.
Weinberger v. Wiesenfeld, 420 U.S. 636 (1975), was a decision by the United States Supreme Court, which unanimously held that the gender-based distinction under 42 U.S.C. § 402(g) of the Social Security Act of 1935—which permitted widows but not widowers to collect special benefits while caring for minor children—violated the right to equal protection secured by the Due Process Clause of ...