Estate Tax Changes Make Death and Taxes Even More Certain
PDF Available By Camerin Ketterling* Joe Biden’s presidential victory in the 2020 election put estate planning attorneys and their clients...
Should Hotels Be Classified as Single Asset Real Estate?
PDF Available By Ryan Deutsch* The recent enactment of the Small Business Reorganization Act of 2019 (“SBRA”) has generated significant...
Ushering in the New Era of Campaign Finance Law: A Discussion on Americans for Prosperity Foundation v. Bonta
PDF Available By Kristen Iteen* In wake of the January 6th Capitol riots, corporate political donations have once again become...
Epic Games v. Apple: Taking on Big Brother
PDF Available By Marcel Ruzan* When Apple Computers released its infamous “1984” commercial during Super Bowl XVIII it was intended...
Alexander Wang, Luxury Fashion, and the Business of Intellectual Property Infringement in Fashion
PDF Available By Markus Benavidez * Jangle Vision, a design house based in California, has...
The Implications of the Supreme Court’s Decision to Uphold Indiana University’s Vaccine Mandate
PDF Available By Shelby Respicio* On August 12, 2021, the Supreme Court denied a request by students at Indiana...
Royal Dutch Shell Ruling Unlikely to Rattle U.S. Oil Companies’ Cages
PDF Available By: Brandon Taylor* In May 2021, a Dutch trial court found that Royal Dutch Shell (“RDS”) had contributed...
Propelling the Practice of Law into the Present: Arizona Approves More Alternative Business Structures
PDF Available By: Courtney Kamauoha* Eighty-six percent of civil legal matters reported by low-income Americans receive no or inadequate legal...
New Treasury Regulations May Open Floodgates for Foreign Investment in Opportunity Zones, but Questions on Tax Implications Remain
By: MICHAEL SHAW
Foreign taxpayers may have a new avenue to avoid gain recognition from U.S. businesses and real estate: distressed American neighborhoods.
Finders Keepers, Losers Weepers? Banking Errors in Cryptocurrency
By: Raynee Cooper
In February 2021, a New York federal judge rejected Citibank’s attempt to recover $504 million erroneously transferred to lenders. Citibank intended to make a loan interest payment on behalf of Revlon, Inc., but instead paid the full outstanding amount of $900 million. Some recipients returned the money, but $504 million remained unreturned and the contention of the case. The court relied on Banque Worms v. Bank America Int’l, 77 N.Y.2d 362 (N.Y. 1998) which held that a creditor can keep payment erroneously made by a third party if the creditor did not realize it was sent in error and did not make any misrepresentations. Here, the court determined that the lenders were not on constructive notice of Citibank’s error. Despite this ruling, Citibank argues that they are entitled to their funds and intends to appeal the court’s decision.