Justices rule for defendants on money laundering
Court Alerts
The Supreme Court on Monday ruled against the government in two money laundering cases, making it more difficult for prosecutors to use an important weapon in the war on drugs and organized crime.
In a unanimous decision, Justice Clarence Thomas said that a money laundering case cannot be proven merely by showing that funds were concealed while being transported.
In a separate 5-4 decision, the court said that money laundering refers to profits of an illegal operation, not gross receipts. The court's interpretation is a narrow one opposed by law enforcement agencies.
Justice Antonin Scalia said the narrow definition will not unduly burden authorities, who must show only that a single instance of unlawful activity was profitable.
Providing the crucial tie-breaking vote, Justice John Paul Stevens refused to go as far as Scalia, saying Congress favored a broader interpretation of the law in cases involving the operation of organized crime syndicates.
Related listings
-
Courts Reject Two Major Vioxx Verdicts
Court Alerts 05/30/2008[##_1L|1197047857.jpg|width="140" height="103" alt=""|_##]Two major court victories for Merck on Thursday pushed the litigation over the painkiller Vioxx closer to conclusion and highlighted the increasing difficulty that plaintiffs’ lawyers were hav...
-
Ex-SEAL trainee's case back in Va. court
Court Alerts 05/29/2008A former Navy SEAL trainee convicted of killing a Georgia college student is headed back to a Virginia court to try to clear his name.Dustin Turner is hoping to overturn his conviction based on a confession by a fellow trainee who also went to prison...
-
Court OKs suits on retaliation in race, age cases
Court Alerts 05/28/2008An unexpected blend of liberal and conservative Supreme Court justices gave workers more leeway Tuesday to sue when they face retaliation after complaining about discrimination in the workplace.In two employment cases, one involving race and the othe...
Grounds for Divorce in Ohio - Sylkatis Law, LLC
A divorce in Ohio is filed when there is typically “fault” by one of the parties and party not at “fault” seeks to end the marriage. A court in Ohio may grant a divorce for the following reasons:
• Willful absence of the adverse party for one year
• Adultery
• Extreme cruelty
• Fraudulent contract
• Any gross neglect of duty
• Habitual drunkenness
• Imprisonment in a correctional institution at the time of filing the complaint
• Procurement of a divorce outside this state by the other party
Additionally, there are two “no-fault” basis for which a court may grant a divorce:
• When the parties have, without interruption for one year, lived separate and apart without cohabitation
• Incompatibility, unless denied by either party
However, whether or not the the court grants the divorce for “fault” or not, in Ohio the party not at “fault” will not get a bigger slice of the marital property.