Case Summaries 08/2011
(plaintiff, river management district, appealed trial court ruling finding that plaintiff lacked authority to take administrative action against defendants for clearing, dredging, and filling of wetlands on approximately 3.5 acres of defendants’ agricultural land; appellate court reversed, concluding plaintiff had authority to take administrative action under Ch. 373 of the Florida Statutes; statute created special taxing districts charged with duty to prevent harm to water resources of district and authority to administer and enforce rules promulgated under statute; appellate court remanded case to trial court for determination of whether defendants’ property qualified as an “exempt closed system” under statute).
(appellate court affirmed trial court dismissal of challenge by individual orchardists and farm association to issuance of development permits to Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission for construction of pedestrian bike trail; on further review, state Supreme Court affirmed; question before appellate court was whether decision to approve permit was a site-specific land use decision; land use decision here was appropriate and board had authority to make site-specific land use decision; orchardists contended that public policy does not permit recreational use to trump agricultural use, but orchardists' claim not timely).
Anno(DHS announcement that it would halt all deportation proceedings against illegal immigrants in "low priority cases" - e.g., those where the illegals are attending school, have family in the military or are primarily responsible for the care of other family members or have family relationships, including homosexual relationships (contrary to Defense of Marriage Act); such persons to be allowed to apply for work permits; only those illegal immigrants to be detained and deported are those who have committed additionalupper-level criminal offenses in the U.S.; act of entering the U.S. illegally as specified in 8 U.S.C. Sec. 1325 to be ignored; announcement mirrors provisions contained in Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors Act that failed to become law; estimates are that 300,000 immigration cases presently in removal status will be reviewed).tation
(defendant's regulation (42 C.F.R. Sec. 412.105(f)(1)(iii)(C)) defined eligible non-patient care activities so as to not include the time medical residents spent on research; regulation promulgated under 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act which court determined applicable provision to be ambiguous and did not answer question as to whether research amounted to eligible "non-patient care activity" and, as a result, had to be counted toward a hospital's full-time equivalent calculation for Medicare purposes; regulation upheld because Medicare focuses primarily on patient care and not medical research; regulation effective retroactively).
(case involved market for products that prevent game animals from detecting presence of hunters through use of activated carbon in clothing; defendant, manufacturer and seller of hunting garments, patented active carbon under brand name “Scent-Lok”; plaintiff hunters commenced class action against defendants and three of its licenses (including Cabela’s) alleging that defendant “uniformly misrepresented to consumers that its odor eliminating clothing would not only eliminate 100% human odors, but could also be reactivated or regenerated in household dryer after clothing has become saturated with odors”; claimed violation of MN Consumer Fraud Act, MN Deceptive Trade Practices Act, and MN Unlawful Trade Practices Act; trial court denied plaintiffs’ motion for class certification because claims lacked commonality; plaintiffs sought permanent injunction against defendants advertisements because they were literally false; court granted permanent injunction; defendants appealed and appellate court vacated lower court judgment and remanded case; plaintiffs failed to prove both requisite irreparable injury and failed to prove literal falsity).
(court reverses Tax Court and holds that treasury regulations establishing that overstatement of basis constitutes omission from gross income triggering six-year statute of limitations under I.R.C. Sec. 6501(e)(1)(A) and Sec. 6229(c)(2); regulations entitled to Chevron deference).
(beneficiaries of estate entered into settlement agreement resulting in executor distributing $190,000 in estate assets and payment of funds to plaintiff to be held in escrow for income tax payment purposes; escrow amount invested in CD; due to liability with possible multiple parties over funds plaintiff put entire amount into court registry; summary judgment for government granted; government has priority to funds for payment of tax claims).
(dispute pertains to damages sustained when defendant's tractor-trailer collided with cow allegedly owned by plaintiff; plaintiff challenged trial court’s $10,000 judgment in favor of defendant, arguing that evidence was legally and factually insufficient to prove a statutory claim against plaintiff; plaintiff further argued that if a common-law duty exists for cattle owner to restrain animals behind fences, then evidence was insufficient to prove he breached that duty, and that the defendant's claim for lost wages was improper measure of damages; appellate court sustained first issue and reversed second and third issues (resulting in outcome that defendant took nothing); no evidence that plaintiff violated common law duty to fix fence and no evidence presented that owner “knowingly” allowed cattle to roam at large as required by state (TX) law).
(petitioner uses a bedroom in home as office for accounting business and built bathroom across from bedroom for client use which is also used by family on occasion; petitioner entitled to deduct expenses to portion of home used exclusively for business; 8.45 percent of total area of home used exclusively for business; no Schedule C deduction for wages paid to daughters because no W-2 or 1099 issued).
(landlord, aunt of tenant, owned 80 acres of farmland and cash-rented the land to the tenant; case involved tenant’s claim for lost profits caused by landlord’s refusal to allow tenant to farm ground during 2008 crop year; landlord did not give tenant timely written notice of termination for year-to-year farm lease as required by state law with respect to 2008 crop year; trial court awarded damages to tenant for approximately $25,000; landlord appealed claiming that parties had reached prior oral agreement that tenant would not farm ground in 2008; appellate court affirmed on issue of tenant’s right to farm land in 2008 under year-to-year lease, and landlord liable for damages for breach of lease; court reversed trial court’s award of damages based on evidentiary error made by trial court).
(plaintiffs filed petition alleging claims for negligence, negligence per se, and breach of contract against defendants; plaintiffs alleged that employee of one of the defendants arranged for an unlicensed grain deal to market grain with delayed or deferred pricing and hedge contracts to employee's customers; plaintiffs delivered grain to ADM but did not receive payment; defendants removed complaints to federal court asserting diversity jurisdiction because only non-diverse defendant was fraudulently joined as defendant in action; federal court did not find defendant had knowledge of bad acts, made no legal misrepresentations; plaintiffs further alleged ADM violated MO requirement that price paid for grain be displayed on scale tickets; ADM asserted it is regulated under U.S. Warehouse Act (USWA) which preempted plaintiffs’ claim under MO law; federal court agreed because Congress intended USWA to supersede state law).
(petitioner and wife divorced and divorce decree stated that petitioner was to pay the mortgage on the former marital home and receive the tax deduction for doing so with such payment not being taxable to former spouse; if former spouse sold home, she was to pay off the mortgage balance and be reimbursed by petitioner; she sold home and petitioner and her entered into settlement agreement as a result of court action with result that petitioner would pay her $20,000 and petitioner's maintenance obligation would terminate; during tax year in issue, petitioner paid former spouse over $21,000 and deducted the amount as alimony; amount not deductible because obligation to continue making payments did not terminate in the event of former wife's death, but just by satisfaction or mortgage or reimbursement to former wife of mortgage payoff amount).
(debtor filed voluntary petition for Ch. 7 relief and claimed residence exempt as rural homestead pursuant to Arkansas Constitution in sum of $350,000; trustee objected on grounds that property was urban in nature and limited in size to ¼ acre; trustee also objected to debtor’s issuance of a deed of trust for $353,000 to his mother and father 30 days before filing of petition; trustee found transaction constituted voluntary transfer avoidable by trustee and recoverable for benefit of bankruptcy estate; court found the property in question had both urban and rural characteristics; court overruled trustee’s objection and found homestead to be rural).
(plaintiff, grape-grower, filed complaint for injunctive and declaratory relief against defendant claiming defendant's advertisement and promotion designed to promote table grapes as “generic commodity with generic quality” was harmful to plaintiff; plaintiff marketed his own brand to distinguish his grapes from generic in effort to secure higher prices and gain repeat customers; plaintiff filed in both state and federal court, but moved to delete federal claims and pursue action in state court; federal court granted remand to state court).
(case involves appeal from trial court judgment arising out of asphalt contractor’s deposit of contaminated fill on appellant’s real property; appellant claimed that trial court erred by granting summary judgment in favor of contractor and ruling that appellant’s claim barred by two-year statute of limitations for improvements to real property and by awarding attorney’s fees to contractor under MN Environmental Response and Liability Act (MERLA) on basis that contractor were prevailing parties; appellate court affirmed trial court’s grant of summary judgment on statute of limitations issue because this was an “improvement to property”; two-year statute of limitations applied, not six-year statute under Minn. Stat. §541.051 for pollution-related claims; appellate court reversed attorney’s fees award under MERLA because appellant’s claims were not frivolous or brought in bad faith).
(plaintiff appealed trial court judgment denying petition for writ of mandamus to compel defendant to institute appropriate eminent domain action to compensate plaintiff for alleged taking of property; plaintiff argued defendant unconstitutionally took its property by gradually encroaching and subjecting pipes that ran beneath property to public use; appellate court held there was no taking because defendant did not design the plans and did not promulgate regulations that involved plaintiff’s property; plaintiff had a “cognizable” dispute with the private developers who routed their runoff through plaintiff’s property).
(feed supplier claimed that livestock production input lien had priority over bank's security interest in same livestock; appellate court affirmed trial court ruling that feed supplier failed to comply with statutory notice requirements by failing to send notice to bank in envelope marked “important-legal notice”; holder of perfected livestock production input lien, in Minnesota, may not obtain priority over lender’s security interest that was perfected earlier in time unless holder of lien complies with lien-notification requirements set forth in Minn. Stat. §514.966(3)(d)).
(plaintiffs appeal trial court's grant of summary judgment in favor of defendant who was successor in interest to and lessee of mineral rights on plaintiffs' land; plaintiffs contend district court erred in construing five leases at issue as requiring defendant to engage in “drilling operations” rather than actual “drilling” in order to extend primary terms of leases; appellate court affirmed; leases contained habendum clauses which specified that lease shall not terminate as long as “drilling or reworking operations are being continuously prosecuted”; Pugh clause specified that defendant must be “engaged” in drilling and reworking operations; two clauses did not contradict each other; general rule is that actual drilling is unnecessary, but location of well sites, hauling of lumbers, providing of water supply and moving equipment in anticipation of drilling process is enough to constitute engagement).
(plaintiff, tomato grower, and defendant, tomato re-packer, filed suit in federal court alleging breach of contract; contract called for sale of tomatoes at specific price and quantities; grower failed to deliver shipments due to weather; ALJ found in favor of defendant, awarding $1,136,599 in damages, plus attorney’s fees, etc.: plaintiff appealed; federal court readjusted damages award to $980,289 plus interest based upon defendant’s incomplete invoices and lack of evidence showing defendant adequately covered when plaintiff failed to deliver).
(Evergreen Solar, Inc., a "renewable energy" company and recipient of $58 million in financial aid and $1.5 million in tax breaks, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy and announced it would be shedding 800 jobs and moving to China; Evergreen listed $485.6 million in debt on bankruptcy schedules).
(IRS determined deficiencies for 2007 and 2008 of $60,227 and 9,869, respectively, and assessed accuracy-related penalties against petitioners, farm labor contractors; deficiencies resulted from disallowance of expense deductions on Sch. C which petitioners failed to substantiate; petitioners did not keep separate books for business; relied on bank statements, subcontractor checks and receipts for expenses, some of which were lost; tax court upheld deficiencies and penalties).
(petitioners, married couple, improperly deducted horse-breeding expenses; husband not in trade or business of breeding horses; lack of evidence with respect to services).
(under amended Sec. 108(f)(4), loan repayments received by participants in state program for healthcare professionals working in underserved areas are not includible in income of recipient).
(author incorrectly claims in editorial (in an attempt to justify tax increase on the "wealthy") that he pays less taxes than his office staff; while author's Form 1040 may show an effective rate of 17.4 percent (which author claims was the effective rate for his most recently filed return), such rate is largely comprised from income generated from sale of stock taxed at capital gain rates; author fails to note that retained corporate earnings have already been subjected to tax at 35 percent rate in addition to capital gain rate imposed at time author sells stock; author also fails to note that tax is imposed on "phantom income" - the inflation of the rise in stock value; effective federal rate actually near 50 percent; the Tax Foundation , a non-partisan tax research group has shown that Mr. Buffet's proposition that taxes should be raised on the "wealthy" to would raise insignificant revenue.
(multiple state attorney generals and state governors, as plaintiffs, filed suit claiming that the individual mandate provision contained in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is an unconstitutional violation of Article I and the Tenth Amendment, and that the uninsured person tax penalty is an unlawful tax in violation of Article I, sections 2 and 9 of the U.S. Constitution; on appeal court affirmed that mandate provision is unconstitutional, but upheld remainder of Act).
(Obama Administration's policy rules promulgated by the U.S. Interior Department and the U.S. Forest Service that restricted exemptions from environmental review for particular oil and gas activities on federal land were issued without proper public notice and comment; exemptions included in 2005 law and were intended to expedite drilling; court's opinion (authored by Obama-appointed judge) stated that the claims made by the plaintiffs were "not speculative and are cognizable"; court also rejected Administration's claims that the lawsuit should be dismissed; substantive issues of case not addressed).
(plaintiffs filed petition for declaratory judgment challenging Missouri Wildlife Code which prohibited hunting from or with “motor driving conveyance” and prohibited deer hunting with aid of dogs (“deer-dogging”); trial court entered judgment declaring challenged regulations unconstitutionally vague and overbroad; MO Dept. of Conservation appealed claiming trial court erred because plaintiffs failed to show vagueness as applied to facts of their case and because regulations convey to a “person of ordinary intelligence a sufficiently definite warning as to proscribed conduct” and regulations did not implicate any first amendment interests; appellate court reversed holding trial court misapplied law in declaring challenged regulations unconstitutionally void for vagueness based on “purely hypothetical factual scenarios instead of plaintiffs’ actual conduct; plaintiffs also failed to prove their free speech and association rights violated as to claim unconstitutional overbreadth).
(homeowner owned one-half interest in residence and defendant claimed it only need pay one-half of insurance policy value upon home's fire destruction; trial court held that full policy amount must be paid because provision in insurance contract limiting recovery to insurable interest void as contrary to Mo. Rev. Stat. Sec. 379.140; MO Sup. Ct. affirmed, as did federal district court; on further appeal, court affirmed; exclusionary provision attempting to limit insurer's liability to less than face value of policy when total loss involved contrary to Mo. Rev. Stat. Sec. 379.140 and void; policy did not define "insurable interest").
(plaintiff successfully sued defendant beef-packing plant to recover for knee injury suffered while working in plant; defendant appealed trial court holding that plaintiff was employee of independent contractor and that her receipt of workers' compensation benefits meant that defendant did not owe landowner’s usual duty of care; majority of Kansas Court of Appeals reversed trial court ruling and held plaintiff’s remedy limited to workers compensation because defendant did not maintain substantial control over employer’s activities on premises; Kansas Supreme Court affirmed in part and reversed in part; landowner in defendant’s position not excluded from liability if its negligence caused injury to independent contractor’s employee while employee is working on landowner’s property; defendant not the employer and not omitted from ranks of third parties that shall be subject to suit under KSA 44-5-4(a); defendant owed plaintiff same duty it owed other entrants onto property- duty to warn of any dangerous condition).
(plaintiff filed suit against seller alleging negligence and strict liability for injuries caused by used hay baler purchased from seller; plaintiff’s arm became caught in baler’s internal moving parts causing amputation of arm; trial court granted summary judgment on both claims in favor of seller holding plaintiff did not prove legal duty of seller to warn or inspect the baler before sale and seller of used equipment not strictly liable; issue before appellate court was whether Kansas law recognizes strict liability claim against seller of used equipment; Kansas Supreme Court reversed holding law permits strict liability against seller of used product given plain language of KPLA and Restatement (2nd) of Torts §402A applied to sellers of any product, used or new).
(debtor owned forested real property from which timber cut and sold; creditor moved to dismiss case arguing debtor not eligible for relief under Chapter 12, because debtor does not meet income requirements; court agreed because debtor could not show that he derived at least 50% of gross income from farming operations; occasional sales of timber on land acquired for other purposes did not make him a "family farmer").
(defendant built partition fence on property line established by survey he commissioned; plaintiff adjoining landowner hired another surveyor to resurvey northern line because he believed defendant had built fence much too far to south; subsequent survey confirmed defendant incorrectly encompassed 35 acres of plaintiff’s land; plaintiff filed suit to establish subsequent survey as indicator of correct property line and trial court found that subsequent survey was correct; defendant appealed and appellate court affirmed).
(petitioners' rental activities were passive due to failure to satisfy 750-hour test; no qualification as real estate professional).
(taxpayer participated in custom-rate adjustable debt structure (CARDS) tax shelter which generated a permanent tax loss for taxpayer; CARDS developed and promoted by Chenery and Associates (investment consultants); tax opinion letter given by Brown & Wood LLP law firm; petitioner liable for 40 percent underpayment penalty contained in I.R.C. Sec. 6662; transaction lacked economic substance; taxpayer also liable for negligence penalty for 2003 because they acted without reasonable cause and had no reasonable basis for claiming NOL carryover deduction on return - unreasonable to rely on tax opinion letter of Brown & Woods LLP due to firm's conflict of interest).
(plaintiff, family farming joint venture, challenges change in property tax classification for grain bins that it uses from agricultural homestead to agricultural-nonhomestead; joint family farm must own or lease property rather than merely use it in order for a party in the joint family farming venture to claim agricultural-homestead classification for property tax purposes).
(property owners sued electric utility alleging that high “neutral-to-earth voltage” gave them shocks in their backyard, reduced property value and caused anxiety to families; plaintiffs claimed nuisance and inverse condemnation; trial court dismissed inverse condemnation claim and jury awarded damages on nuisance claim; both parties appealed; appellate court affirmed and held electric utility could be found liable on basis of nuisance to property owner for interfering with use and enjoyment of property due to stray current even though utility exercised due care in efforts to control stray current - negligence and nuisance not the same thing).
(landowners, including plaintiff, successfully petitioned for construction of public drainage ditch; subsequently lower-lying residential landowners complained of flooded basements; county drainage board assessed “reconstruction” fee for all landowners to remedy flooding; plaintiff argued his property was located at high end of watershed and his land would not be benefitted by reconstruction assessment; plaintiff appealed trial court’s order denying petition for judicial review in favor or county drainage board; issue on appeal was whether trial court erred in concluding drainage board decision not arbitrary and capricious; appellate court reversed and remanded with instructions for trial court to reconsider evidence on the record regarding benefit to plaintiff’s land, as defined by statute and case law cited in appellate court opinion).
(IRS issued petitioners notice of deficiency for tax years 2001, 2002, and 2003 ($68,029, $79,941, and $6,661, respectively); IRS also assessed accuracy-related penalty for each year at issue; petitioners seek review of IRS determination and claim liability for only parts of deficiency and penalty; tax court affirmed IRS deficiency and penalties; §61(a) includes in gross income all income from whatever source derived, including income from illicit means (i.e. embezzlement); IRS claimed embezzled funds should be included as income, because petitioner misappropriated funds as an employee of corporation and had dominion and control over funds; using stolen funds as contribution to capital does not relieve responsibility to report funds as income; court affirmed penalties as petitioners offered no reasonable cause or substantial authority for failure to report income).
(agricultural organization's only activity (since 1928( involves promoting and improving a certain breed of livestock in the northeastern U.S. for the benefit of the organization's members; I.R.C. Sec. 501(c)(3) status revoked; organization not organized and operated exclusively for charitable or educational purposes).
(landowners, including plaintiff, successfully petitioned for construction of public drainage ditch; subsequently lower-lying residential landowners complained of flooded basements; county drainage board assessed “reconstruction” fee for all landowners to remedy flooding; plaintiff argued his property was located at high end of watershed and his land would not be benefitted by reconstruction assessment; plaintiff appealed trial court’s order denying petition for judicial review in favor or county drainage board; issue on appeal was whether trial court erred in concluding drainage board decision not arbitrary and capricious; appellate court reversed and remanded with instructions for trial court to reconsider evidence on the record regarding benefit to plaintiff’s land, as defined by statute and case law cited in appellate court opinion).
(married couple sold their corporate stock back to the corporation in return for monthly payments over a 15-year period; payments to be made to heirs of either husband or wife in event of disability or death; husband died and will disinherited three sons and left balance of property to surviving spouse for life with remainder to fourth son; upon surviving spouse's death remainderman filed breach of contract action claiming that corporation had not made required payments; trial court summary judgment for remainderman granted on basis that contract with corporation demonstrated that couple intended to make lifetime gift of payments to all of their sons; on appeal, court reversed on basis that couple retained distributional control over payments - no gift because no irrevocable present intent to transfer ownership).
(case involves claims of violation of Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments surrounding deputy sheriff's seizure of horses on suspicion of animal neglect; claims rejected - probably cause present for seizure; seizure lawful).
(petitioner, shareholder in S corporation, gave majority of shares petitioner held in S corporation to son and received distributions that were in excess of petitioner's remaining adjusted basis in S corporation stock; once shares are no longer owned, there is no basis attributable to those shares in the taxpayer's hands; distributions exceeded taxpayer's basis and were long-term capital gain in nature).
(decedent's disclaimer of bequest from parent with resulting passage of disclaimed property to decedent's children not a gift resulting in gift tax liability to decedent's estate or decedent's wife's estate; state (MS) anti-lapse statute direct that when deceased beneficiary is child of testator, bequest does not lapse, but passes as if legatee had survived testator and then died intestate; to extent disclaimer resulted in lapsed bequest, disclaimed interest passed without any direction on decedent's part and constituted qualified disclaimer with no resulting gift tax liability).
(defendant indicted for conspiracy to manufacture methamphetamine; trial court granted defendant’s motion to suppress evidence obtained during searches of outbuilding behind home; appellate court affirmed; defendant argued officers violated Fourth Amendment when entering protected “curtilage” of house without warrant or probable cause coupled with exigent circumstances; appellate court ruled “totality of the circumstances” did not support government’s claim that exigent circumstance excused officers’ failure to obtain warrant prior to entering defendant’s backyard; court further held Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable searches and seizures extends to curtilage surrounding home and should be treated as home itself; driveway entry included as curtilage; 8th Circuit routinely applies Dunn factors in these cases (1) proximity of area claimed to be curtilage of home; (2) whether area included within enclosure surrounding home; (3) nature of uses to which area put, and (4) steps taken by resident to protect area from observation by passers-by); open areas contiguous to person’s home not protected).
(hobby loss case; IRS determined deficiencies for 2005 and 2006 in respective amounts of $46,504 and $34,500; issue was whether petitioners’ horse breeding activity constituted activity for profit under IRC §183; tax court found facts of case did not indicate petitioners’ horse activity was motivated or driven by personal pleasure alone; though petitioners’ business plan did not work out and income did not exceed expenses, there were actual hopes for horse sales at a profit and petitioners’ were operating as a “business”; sufficient profit objective present).
(after signing into law the debt increase bill on Aug. 2, Administration increased U.S. national debt by $242.155 billion in four days; according to U.S. Bureau of Public Debt historical numbers, increased amount represents an increase in national debt greater (in inflation-adjusted dollars) than the total increase in the debt during the Truman and Eisenhower Administrations from the end of fiscal year 1950 to the end of fiscal year 1960; national debt subject to debt limit increased to $14.536130 trillion).
(defendant, owner of Iowa hog slaughter and processing facility, employs 1500 hourly production workers and paid those on the kill, cut, and conversion floors, in part, on a “gang time” basis (time when processing lines moving and workers physically at assembly line and lines moving; does not include prep time, “donning and doffing” protective gear); workers paid minimal “extra” minutes for donning and doffing; plaintiff class claimed compensation for unpaid wages during 30 minute meal period and argued “continuous workday” rule requires employers to pay employee for “all integral and indispensable activities” that occur between first and last principal activities of employee’s workday (including doffing and donning); defendant’s motion for partial summary judgment on plaintiff’s claim denied; plaintiffs also argued that defendants should not be allowed to assert defense that doffing and donning is not compensable; plaintiffs argued such activities were “integral and indispensable” to meat processing and take place during continuous workday; plaintiffs’ motion for partial summary judgment denied; 1947 “Portal-to-Portal Act” of FLSA excludes some activities from “working time,” but issue remains for fact finder on whether doffing and donning, here, is “integral and indispensable”).
(notice of issuance and availability of training and employment guidance letter governing the labor certification process for employers engaged in sheepherding and goat-herding occupations under the H-2A program; Obama Administration allowing ranchers to import foreign shepherds to temporarily tend flocks of sheep and goats if in compliance with regulations; U.S. ranchers wanting to hire non-U.S. herder must submit application to federal and state officials between 60 and 75 days before date of need and application must attest that there are not sufficient willing, able and qualified U.S. herders available, and that employment of foreign shepherd will not adversely impact working conditions of similarly situated U.S. workers; if U.S. shepherd available for job, employer must try to place qualified applicant in geographic area of choice within three working days of telephone interview; Administration has crafted official shepherd job description; employment of foreign shepherd cannot exceed one year (extensions permitted) and shepherd must be paid no less than "prevailing wage" in the state; shepherds must be provided with cell or satellite phone or radio transmitter at no charge, workers' compensation coverage, three meals a day without charge and employer must cover all travel costs of shepherd to and from work place).
(taxpayer, non-resident of Iowa, received income from various Iowa sources; IDOR notes that non-residents must file an Iowa return if Iowa-source income is greater than $1,000 (Iowa Code Sec. 422.13); taxpayer works in Albia one week per month as chiropractor and sells nutritional products).