|
|
Daily Case Update Archive
As a service to our members, we monitor opinions issued from the
Ohio Supreme Court, the
Ohio State First District
Court of Appeals, and the United
States Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals. You can read
the latest summaries or archived summaries from
2005 ,
2006 ,
2007 ,
2008 ,
2009 ,
2010.
If you would like to receive a daily e-mail with same-day case updates,
please join our Subscribers-Only
discussion list. Not a subscriber?
Join today!
Jan. 23, 2006
Ohio Supreme Court
| Ohio First District |
U.S. 6th Circuit - Ohio | U.S. 6th Circuit - Other States
TOPICS:
- Fifth Amendment - psychiatric evaluation
- Internal Revenue Service - corporate-owned life insurance
- Ohio Supreme Court
-
- No Opinions.
-
- First District Court of Appeals
- [Search Other Ohio Districts]
- No Opinions.
-
-
U.S. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals: Ohio Cases
-
- Linscott v. Rose (January 23, 2006) (Appeal from N.D. Ohio)
-
http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/06a0033p-06.pdf
- Linscott, an Ohio state prisoner convicted of two counts of
gross sexual imposition, appeals the district court decision denying his
petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Linscott's petition challenges the
use of a court-ordered, pretrial psychiatric evaluation at sentencing.
Linscott claims the use of the psychiatric evaluation violated his Fifth
Amendment privilege against self-incrimination. The district court held
that Linscott's claim was barred under the one-year statute of
limitations imposed by the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act
of 1996 ("AEDPA"), 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1)(A). As explained below, we
find that Linscott's petition was timely. Nonetheless, after reviewing
the merits of Linscott's petition, we affirm the district court's
decision to deny the petition.
- U.S. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals: Other States Cases
-
-
Dow Chem Co v. USA (January 23, 2006) (Appeal from E.D.
Michigan)
-
http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/06a0032p-06.pdf
- In 1988 and 1991, Plaintiff-Appellee The Dow Chemical Company
("Dow") purchased corporate-owned life insurance ("COLI") policies on
the lives of thousands of its employees. In the taxable years 1989 to
1991, Dow claimed deductions for interest incurred on loans used to pay
the COLI premiums and for fees related to the administration of the
policies. The Internal Revenue Service ("IRS") disallowed these
deductions and assessed tax deficiencies and interest, which Dow paid
under protest and attempted to recover by suing for a refund. Following
a bench trial, the district court ruled that the IRS had improperly
disallowed the deductions and ordered judgment in Dow's favor.
|
Daily Case Updates
|