Harbor Pool Room in Panama City, Florida. He could not afford an attorney and the
After the money was inherited to her and not her step mother she bought a 3 story mansion with a telephone and indoor plumbing which she had never had before even though they could afford. They said that she want the money to buy herself a nicer home with other things she had wanted her whole life but her dad would not allow it (Berni, C. (1997). After he died she went a bought what she had
When the couple left for the weekend to complete the purchase, they never returned home.
On January 15th, 2018, the defendant, Mary Taylor, was accused of refusing to serve the plaintiff, Brianna Banks, at Mary’s Diner located in downtown Atlanta. Ms Banks, an African American woman, claimed that she walked into the diner, sat herself as customers were directed to do, and, after 20 minutes of waiting in the diner during what she described as a “slow time”, was not helped by Ms Taylor. Banks then proceeded to get up from her table, caused a loud altercation with the hostess at the diner, accusing the business of being racist and claiming that “if her skin was white, she would have been helped within seconds”, and then exited the establishment. After leaving the diner, Brianna Banks went home and did some research on Mary Taylor,
Paddleboating was one of the activities offered at the resort. During the trial one of the main focuses for the plaintiff was the upkeep of these paddleboats. Repairs were made a short time before the accident occurred and the plaintiff argued the defendents knowledge of the leaks located in the boat which caused the boats to be prone to filling with water and become unstable.
Appelant didn’t have a supervisory relationship with Karen Lyda and had never gave her any instruction ever. He did not event set Karen Lyda's schedule and that was pre-set before he arrived at the store and she never asked for any time off. Karen Lyda testified in her deposition that appellant neither evaluated nor disciplined her. Lyda. Id. at 66. She Also testified that, when she went from full-time to part-time, she knew that her new schedule had to be approved by the corporate office and appellant didn’t had such an authority. Lyda Dep. at 30.
She asked the trustees where it would all end. Did they want her as well because she was his wife and he touched her? In October, the case was settled out of court with each side apparently getting part of what they wanted. Meredith Bushnell, the attorney for Robin’s kids Zachary, Zelda, and Cody, released this statement to the Associated Press. “I think they 're just very happy to have this behind them." Susan gets to remain in the home, as Robin wanted until she passes away and her bills with the home would always be taken care
Candy was left the remaining assets of the accounting business, Leroy’s inheritance , and a nice social security pension. Linda was left with similar monetary shares, but gained more financial stability by liquidating all of their remaining assets in Longview, such as his father's farm and house, their house, and the business. Lastly, she was able to collect his social security even though she didn't think she could due to Texas policy laws. After discussing financial stability, both began to talk about remaining financial responsibilities left to them after the passing of the spouse. Mrs. Clinkscale reported her sole responsibility was taking care of her god children, the house and car were already paid for so she just maintains the utilities and upkeeps of the grounds. Ultimately she has a lot of leisure money. Mrs. Snoddy reported being left with the financial responsibility of taking care of Wayne's mother. Taking care of her mother in law had adverse psychological effects on Linda, because before the death of Mr.Snoddy they were all supposed to move to Dallas together under one roof. With her husband's passing Linda wanted to start over and live by herself for a variety of reasons, one being financially she couldn't support two people, so she did her best to help his mother liquidate some remaining assets in Longview so she could be financially stable on her
In the second case, Stanton was working at Trinity church for 10 years and received a payment of $20,000 when he resigned to open his own business. Stanton did not claim the money he received in his tax return. The court ruled that this is a gift because the money was given as result of respect and the church did not expect any further economic relationship between the donor, The Trinity church and the donee, Stanton, and it does not need to be included in the taxpayer’s tax return.
Case Brief- U.S. v. Martha Stewart and Peter Bacanovic, 305 F. Supp. 2d 368 (SDNY 2004)
Owner and Operator of BBB Electric, Witness Gustavo Flores claimed that Claimant Jose Valadez is his brother-in-law whom he has helped out by having the claimant come by his shop twice a week in January 2013 to the office to clean and pick-up at the office. He said the claimant has always had financial difficulties. He would give the claimant money for a home to pay for rent and food because he felt sorry for this brother-in-law, Claimant Valadez. In January 2013, Witness Flores said the claimant started coming to his office twice a week and would do some household chores by picking up and arranging things at his office. He said that the work the claimant’s work inside the office was not considered “heavy duty” where the claimant would work between five to eight hours a day.
Mr. Packard and his wife bought a house in 2009 and applied for a $6,500 tax credit. Mr. Packard did not own a principal residence before, and Mrs. Packard owned and lived a principal residence in the past five year. Two policies can apply for the individual $6,500 tax credit: “first time buyer (§ 36(c)(1))” and “long-term resident exception (§ 36(c)(6))”. In other words, it means a person either first time purchased a principal residence, or owned and used the same residence as such individual’s principal residence for any 5-consecutive-year period during the 8-year period.
Whenever surveillance expenses are incurred for home improvement and serve the common interest of the spouses, the court has ruled it as a community obligation. In First Sec. Bank & Trust Co. v. Dooley, 480 So. 2d 842, 844 (La. App. 2d Cir. 1985) the court reasoned that since the wife spent a considerable amount of money on home improvement, the debt was for the common interest of the community. In this case, the defendant borrowed money from a bank. Majority of the loan was spent on home improvements. When the spouses’ filed for divorce, the husband argued that the loan was a separate obligation. However, both parties benefitted from the use of the loan.
WC asked Tenant how he was doing and he responded he is doing fine and has no pressing issues or concerns to report. He reports he has no money management problems or depression bouts.
The Clarkson v. Orkin Exterminating Co. Inc. case took place in the year 1985. Mrs. Clarkson sued Orkin Exterminating Co. Inc. for three distinct charges. Orkin had a contract with both the previous owner of which Mrs. Clarkson inherited after purchasing the house. The agreement stated that Orkin Exterminating Company was to be paid a certain amount of money to handle exterminating practices in this case; spraying of termites. Upon the completion of this, the contract also stated that the exterminating firm was to offer free exterminating services if at all there was a recurrence of the above-stated issue. Mrs. Clarkson moved to court claiming that Orkin had failed to deliver its end of the bargain.