Abercrombie & Fitch Co. sued superstar Beyonce Knowles for trademark infringement, unfair competition and deceptive trade practices. The clothing retailer believes that Beyonce intends to use Beyonce’s alter ego name, Sasha Fierce, on a new perfume made by Coty, Inc. Coty has manufactured and marketed perfumes for Gwen Stefani, Jennifer Lopez and Sarah Jessica Parker.
The Wall St. Journal has a column written by former Judge Andrew Napolitano. The column begins:
Last week, I asked South Carolina Congressman James Clyburn, the third-ranking Democrat in the House of Representatives, where in the Constitution it authorizes the federal government to regulate the delivery of health care. He replied: “There’s nothing in the Constitution that says that the federal government has anything to do with most of the stuff we do.” Then he shot back: “How about [you] show me where in the Constitution it prohibits the federal government from doing this?”
Rep. Clyburn, like many of his colleagues, seems to have conveniently forgotten that the federal government has only specific enumerated powers. He also seems to have overlooked the Ninth and 10th Amendments, which limit Congress’s powers only to those granted in the Constitution.
On September 14, 2009, the United States Tax Court ruled that a New York tax lawyer could not deduct medical expenses over $100,000 that he paid for prostitutes and pornographic materials. See Halby v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2009-204 (Sept. 14, 2009). From the court’s opinion:
During 2004 and 2005 petitioner frequented prostitutes in New York. Petitioner did not visit these prostitutes as part of a course of therapy prescribed by his doctor, nor did petitioner ask his doctor to prescribe any sort of sex therapy. Petitioner kept track of these visits in a journal. . . .
During 2004 and 2005 petitioner purchased pornography and books and magazines on sex therapy. Petitioner also recorded the dates and amounts of the purchases in his journal. . . .
The $73,934 disallowed by respondent for 2004 included: (1) $2,368 for medical books, magazines, videos, and pornographic material;
[and] (2) $65,934 for prostitutes … The $47,024 disallowed for 2005 included: (1) $5,005 for books, magazines, videos, and pornographic materials; and (2) $42,152 for prostitutes. . . .The issue for decision is whether petitioner is entitled to deduct amounts paid to prostitutes and for medical texts and pornographic materials. Respondent argues that petitioner is not entitled to deduct amounts paid to prostitutes because such payments were illegal and petitioner has not provided substantiation as required by section 1.213-1(h), Income Tax Regs. Respondent argues that petitioner is not entitled to a deduction for amounts paid for books on sex therapy and pornographic material because those amounts were incurred for petitioner’s general welfare, not pursuant to a doctor’s prescription or for a specific medical condition. . . .
We agree with respondent that petitioner is not entitled to deduct the amounts at issue. Patronizing a prostitute is illegal in the State of New York. . . .
Petitioner is likewise not entitled to deductions for amounts paid for books and magazines on sex therapy and pornography. The purchases were not for the treatment of a medical condition but were instead personal items. . . .
Petitioner did not have reasonable cause or a reasonable basis for claiming the deductions at issue. Petitioner has been an attorney for 40 years and specialized in tax law. Petitioner should have known that his visits to prostitutes in New York were illegal and that section 213, the regulations thereunder, and caselaw do not support his claimed deductions. Accordingly, petitioner is liable for the section 6662 penalty.
The lawyer previously lost a state tax case on the same issues. For more lurid details, see the New York Post story called “Kinky Bid to be Tax XXX-empt – Atty Hooker Therapy KO’d.”
A dispute that started in 1991 over the NFL’s Washington Redskins name has reached the United States Supreme Court. The lawyer for the plaintiffs, a group of Native Americans, filed a petition for certiorari in the case titled Susan Harjo v. Pro-Football, Inc. He said
“This is a derogatory term for Indians that sticks out like an anomaly,” said Mause today. “No other group still has to deal with this kind of a term being used” in such a public and widespread way.
During the heated debate about national healthcare some people have claimed that one of the primary causes of the high cost of care is lawsuits brought against physicians and other healthcare providers. A recent jury verdict in Saranac Lake, New York, illustrates this fact.
The jury found that Dr. Patricia Monroe and Adirondack Internal Medicine and Pediatrics were guilty of malpractice and are liable to an 18 year old girl and her 16 year old sister $11 million. The jury said the girls’ pediatrician Dr. Monroe was negligent because she did not prevent the girls from being repeatedly sexually assaulted by their half-brother nine years earlier when the boy was 14.
The lawyer for Dr. Monroe said “I was surprised they found any negligence, and then I was really flabbergasted by the amount. That’s why New York state needs tort reform. These kind of verdicts are driving doctors out of the state.”
The initial lawsuit, which was filed in 2002, named other defendants whom the girls’ mother had contacted for help, including the Lake Placid Central School District, then-Lake Placid Middle/High School Principal Robert Schiller, then-school Psychologist Randy Quayle, Essex County, St. Agnes Parochial (Catholic) School and the Catholic Diocese of Ogdensburg. But those “mandated reporter” claims were ultimately dismissed.