Calif. Court Nixes $21M Claim Against Travel Sites
Lawyer Blogs
A judge ruled Monday that online travel sites such as Expedia do not owe the city of Anaheim $21 million in hotel taxes for rooms booked over the Internet, the first ruling of its kind in California on an issue that has bubbled up in cities across the country.
In her ruling, Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Carolyn Kuhl set aside last year's decision by a city hearing officer that the travel booking sites owed $21.3 million to Anaheim in back hotel taxes.
The city is reviewing its options, spokeswoman Marty DeSollar said in an e-mailed statement.
A coalition of the online travel sites, including Priceline, Expedia Inc., Orbitz, Hotwire, Hotels.com and Trip Network Inc., filed papers asking to overturn the hearing officer's ruling.
Such disputes are increasingly common between online travel companies and tourist-dependent cities.
Lawsuits or complaints have been filed around the country by cities or customers, including in Georgia, Maryland, Texas, New York, Illinois, Pennsylvania and in the California cities of San Diego and San Francisco.
Related listings
-
High court's ruling is a blow to campaign finance reform
Lawyer Blogs 01/28/2010A conservative legal foundation on Wednesday asked federal regulators to give a green light to corporations and unions to begin spending their treasuries to influence this year's congressional elections. The James Madison Center for Free Speech asked...
-
Oklahoma high court allows some use of line-item veto
Lawyer Blogs 01/27/2010The state Supreme Court ruled in a 5-4 vote Tuesday that the governor has line-item veto power on sections of legislation that place "conditions or restrictions on previously appropriated funds.” The decision handed down Tuesday ends a legal challeng...
-
Court Stops NYC Suit Vs. Online Cigarette Vendor
Lawyer Blogs 01/26/2010The Supreme Court has ruled against New York City in its effort to use federal racketeering law to sue Internet cigarette sellers for lost tax revenue. By a 5-3 vote Monday, the court ended the city's lawsuit against Hemi Group, a New Mexico-based co...
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.