Скачать презентацию Acknowledging Cultural Diversity 35 th Annual Meeting of Скачать презентацию Acknowledging Cultural Diversity 35 th Annual Meeting of

f40e783b869a6f41592780c162c15ce3.ppt

  • Количество слайдов: 20

Acknowledging Cultural Diversity 35 th Annual Meeting of the National Conference of State Tax Acknowledging Cultural Diversity 35 th Annual Meeting of the National Conference of State Tax Judges Cambridge, Massachusetts October 8, 2015

2 Hon. Bernice B. Donald U. S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit 2 Hon. Bernice B. Donald U. S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit Memphis, Tennessee

3 Dolal v. Metropolitan Airports Commission Would you issue an injunction prohibiting enforcement of 3 Dolal v. Metropolitan Airports Commission Would you issue an injunction prohibiting enforcement of the city ordinance? Yes No Municipal Ordinance

4 Tenn. Code Ann. § 67 -5 -212(b)(3)(B). “If a religious institution acquires property 4 Tenn. Code Ann. § 67 -5 -212(b)(3)(B). “If a religious institution acquires property that was duly exempt at the time of transfer from a transferor who had previously been approved for a religious use exemption of the property, or if a religious institution acquires property to replace its own exempt property, then the effective date of exemption shall be three (3) years prior to the date of application, or the date the acquiring institution began to use the property for religious purposes, whichever is later. The purpose of this subdivision (b)(3) is to provide continuity of exempt status for property transferred from one exempt religious institution to another …. ”

5 In re: Islamic Ctr. of Nashville, Exempt No. 80212 (Tenn. Bd. of Equal. 5 In re: Islamic Ctr. of Nashville, Exempt No. 80212 (Tenn. Bd. of Equal. Feb. 9, 2015). Should property which has been used continuously for religious purposes be declared exempt doing the three-year Lookback period under TN law, even though during most of that time it was owned by a for-profit banking institution? Yes No Religion/Tax Exemption

6 Kollasch v Adamany, 313 N. W. 2 d 47 (Wis. 1981) Should a 6 Kollasch v Adamany, 313 N. W. 2 d 47 (Wis. 1981) Should a religious order which operates a retreat and conference Center, open to people of all faiths, and which provides food and lodging for a fee but does not make a profit, be declared to have a “commercial purpose” and therefore be subject to taxation? Yes No Religion/Tax Exemption

7 Ramapough Mountain Indians v Mahwah Township, 2012 WL 4465575 (N. J. Tax Ct. 7 Ramapough Mountain Indians v Mahwah Township, 2012 WL 4465575 (N. J. Tax Ct. Mar. 28, 2012). Does real property used for a religious purpose, without a building on it qualify for the New Jersey tax exemption that exempts "all buildings used in the work of associations and corporations organized exclusively for religious purposes, including religious worship or charitable purposes? Yes No Religion/Tax Exemption

8 Vedanta Society of Portland, OR v. Multomah County Assessor, TCMD 14042 N (Or. 8 Vedanta Society of Portland, OR v. Multomah County Assessor, TCMD 14042 N (Or. T. C. 2015)). Does a residential house that is used for religious purposes as well as a residence for two worshippers qualify for exemption under the Oregon Tax Code? Yes No Religion/Tax Exemption

9 Cavel Int’l, Inc. v. Madigan Does the Illinois statute violate the Commerce Clause 9 Cavel Int’l, Inc. v. Madigan Does the Illinois statute violate the Commerce Clause (which prohibits state laws that unduly interfere with foreign commerce)? Yes No Commerce Clause

10 Onveanusi v. Pan Am Is cultural evidence on (a) the condition of the 10 Onveanusi v. Pan Am Is cultural evidence on (a) the condition of the corpse, and (b) the shunning of Plaintiff’s family, admissible in determining the quantum of damages? Yes No Evidence/Damages

11 Religious Freedom Restoration Act, 42 U. S. C. § 2000 bb-1 (a) IN 11 Religious Freedom Restoration Act, 42 U. S. C. § 2000 bb-1 (a) IN GENERAL Government shall not substantially burden a person’s exercise of religion even if the burden results from a rule of general applicability, except as provided in subsection (b) of this section.

12 Religious Freedom Restoration Act, 42 U. S. C. § 2000 bb-1 (b) EXCEPTION 12 Religious Freedom Restoration Act, 42 U. S. C. § 2000 bb-1 (b) EXCEPTION Government may substantially burden a person’s exercise of religion only if it demonstrates that application of the burden to the person: (1) is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest; and (2) is the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest.

13 Gurdev Kaur Cheema v. Harold Thompson, 67 F. 3 d 883 (9 th 13 Gurdev Kaur Cheema v. Harold Thompson, 67 F. 3 d 883 (9 th Cir. 1995) Has the religious freedom of a person been infringed or burdened by some government action? Yes No Religious Freedom

14 Adeyeye v. Heartland Sweeteners, LLC Would you affirm or reverse the district court’s 14 Adeyeye v. Heartland Sweeteners, LLC Would you affirm or reverse the district court’s grant of summary judgment to Heartland for lack of notice of the religious character of Adeyeye’s requests for leave? Yes No Employment Law

15 Dumpson v. Daniel M. Would you order the removal of the boy from 15 Dumpson v. Daniel M. Would you order the removal of the boy from the home? Yes No Child Rearing

16 Nischal v. Nischal Should the foreign residence of the mother and child reduce 16 Nischal v. Nischal Should the foreign residence of the mother and child reduce the amount of monthly child support to be paid by the father? Yes No Child Support

17 Massachusetts v. Timmareddy and Meenaksh Should parental rights be terminated and the child 17 Massachusetts v. Timmareddy and Meenaksh Should parental rights be terminated and the child allowed to be adopted? Yes No Parental Termination

18 In Re: Jertrude Was the court correct in removing the child from the 18 In Re: Jertrude Was the court correct in removing the child from the home absent a finding that a parent had engaged in child abuse? Yes No Child Abuse & Neglect/Removal

19 People v. Ezeonu Is defendant’s second or junior marriage valid under New York 19 People v. Ezeonu Is defendant’s second or junior marriage valid under New York law thereby providing a defense to a charge of rape? Yes No Child Marriage

20 California v. Moua, No. 31572 -0 (Fresno Cnty, Super. Ct. Feb. 7, 1985) 20 California v. Moua, No. 31572 -0 (Fresno Cnty, Super. Ct. Feb. 7, 1985) Based on what you have heard so far, how would you find the charges of kidnapping and rape? Not Guilty Child Marriage