Shockley v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Case No. 16-13473 (11th Cir. 2017).
The Internal Revenue Service is permitted to disregard transactions, including “Midco” transactions, that are without economic reality and may impose taxes irrespective of the (disallowed) transaction.Savannah College of Art and Design, Inc. v. Sportswear, Inc., No. 15-13830 (11th Cir. 2017).
The protections of federally registered service marks carry over to goods under Eleventh Circuit precedent; Crystal Entertainment &Filmworks, Inc. v. Jurado, 643 F.3d 1313, 1315–16 (11th Cir. 2011), is distinguished as it deals with common-law trademarks and not federally registered marks.Emerald Coast Utilities Authority v. Bear Marcus Pointe, LLC, Case No. 1D15-5714 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017).
Upon rehearing, the First District reaffirms there is no “excusable neglect” to permit the filing of belated appeal when the claimed excusable neglect was error to timely see the final judgment email due to the law firm’s computer system not being configured to correctly receive and store emails.Managed Care Insurance Consultants, Inc. v. United Healthcare Insurance Company, Case No. 4D16-2767 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017).
The Federal Arbitration Act allows vacatur of an arbitration award only when there is “evident partialityor corruption in the arbitrators[,]” 9 U.S.C. § 10(a)(2) (2015), and “’evident partiality’ [means when] a (1) an actual conflict exists, or (2) the arbitratorknows of, but fails to disclose, information which would lead a reasonableperson to believe that a potential conflict exists.” Gianelli Money Purchase Plan & Trust v. ADM Investor Services, Inc., 146 F.3d 1309, 1312 (11th Cir. 1998).
