Attorney General Opinion No. 1987-027 PDF Download
Are you looking for read ebook online? Search for your book and save it on your Kindle device, PC, phones or tablets. Download Attorney General Opinion No. 1987-027 PDF full book. Access full book title Attorney General Opinion No. 1987-027 by Robert T. Stephan. Download full books in PDF and EPUB format.
Author: Robert T. Stephan
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category :
Languages : en
Pages :
Get Book Here
Book Description
As a condition precedent to receipt of a motor vehicle registration, K.S.A. 1986 Supp. 8-173 requires payment of all personal property taxes levied against the registrant for the preceding year. The statute does not on its face or in its application create any classification which could give rise to an equal protection challenge under the Fourteenth Amendment. Accordingly, K.S.A. 1986 Supp. 8-173 is valid under the Fourteenth Amendment to the constitution of the United States. Cited Herein: K.S.A. 1986 Supp. 8-173; U.S. Const., Fourteenth Amend.
Author: Robert T. Stephan
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category :
Languages : en
Pages :
Get Book Here
Book Description
As a condition precedent to receipt of a motor vehicle registration, K.S.A. 1986 Supp. 8-173 requires payment of all personal property taxes levied against the registrant for the preceding year. The statute does not on its face or in its application create any classification which could give rise to an equal protection challenge under the Fourteenth Amendment. Accordingly, K.S.A. 1986 Supp. 8-173 is valid under the Fourteenth Amendment to the constitution of the United States. Cited Herein: K.S.A. 1986 Supp. 8-173; U.S. Const., Fourteenth Amend.
Author: Robert T. Stephan
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category :
Languages : en
Pages :
Get Book Here
Book Description
A private, nonprofit corporation is subject to the Kansas open meetings act if it receives public funds in its operations and acts as a governmental agency in providing services to the public. As Handicapped Education and Living Programs, Inc. meets both requirements, it is our opinion that the board of directors of this organization is subject to the act. Cited herein: K.S.A. 75-4317; 75-4317a; K.S.A. 1987 Supp. 75-4318.
Author: Robert T. Stephan
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category :
Languages : en
Pages :
Get Book Here
Book Description
In 3̲2̲4̲ ̲L̲i̲q̲u̲o̲r̲ ̲C̲o̲r̲p̲.̲ ̲v̲.̲ ̲D̲u̲f̲f̲y̲, the Supreme Court of the United States held that the State of New York's statutory scheme for maintenance and control of retail liquor prices was in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act. The Court also held that New York's pricing system would not be saved under the "state-action exemption" from the antitrust laws (due to the fact that the state did not actively supervise the pricing system) or the Twenty-first Amendment to the United States Constitution (because the asserted state interests were not substantiated and did not suffice to afford such immunity). In Kansas, distributors are to file current bottle and case prices with the Director of the Division of Alcoholic Beverage Control. The Alcoholic Beverage Control Board is required to establish a minimum markup to be added on to the bottle price on file at the time of retail sale. The Board does not regulate the prices posted by distributors and has not adjusted the markup percentage for distilled spirits for approximately ten years. The pricing system for alcoholic liquor sales in Kansas is so closely aligned with that of New York that it too is in violation of antitrust laws. As a practical matter, prices are set by private industry and the State does not "actively" supervise the pricing system. Additionally, the United States Supreme Court held that unsubstantiated claims that the system promotes temperance and protects small liquor retailers are not sufficient to afford immunity under the Twenty-first Amendment. Cited herein: K.S.A. 41-1101; 41-1111; 41-1114; 41-1115; 41-1116; 41-1117; 41-1118; K.A.R. 13-4-2; 15 U.S.C. section 1.
Author: American Bar Association. House of Delegates
Publisher: American Bar Association
ISBN: 9781590318737
Category : Law
Languages : en
Pages : 216
Get Book Here
Book Description
The Model Rules of Professional Conduct provides an up-to-date resource for information on legal ethics. Federal, state and local courts in all jurisdictions look to the Rules for guidance in solving lawyer malpractice cases, disciplinary actions, disqualification issues, sanctions questions and much more. In this volume, black-letter Rules of Professional Conduct are followed by numbered Comments that explain each Rule's purpose and provide suggestions for its practical application. The Rules will help you identify proper conduct in a variety of given situations, review those instances where discretionary action is possible, and define the nature of the relationship between you and your clients, colleagues and the courts.
Author: Robert T. Stephan
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category :
Languages : en
Pages :
Get Book Here
Book Description
K.S.A. 20-105 provides that to be qualified to hold the office of justice of the supreme court or judge of the court of appeals, a person must have been regularly admitted to practice law in Kansas and have engaged in the active and continuous practice of law for a period of at least ten years prior to the date of appointment as justice or judge. Though the strict definition of "active practice" would require that the legal activities of the person in question be pursued on a full-time basis and constitute his regular business, the general rule that statutory provisions imposing qualifications for office should be construed in favor of those seeking to hold office would serve to soften this requirement. Thus, a potential nominee need not be a full-time trial attorney to be considered as actively engaged in the practice of law, and is not automatically disqualified merely for holding a position which does not require legal expertise. Cited herein: K.S.A. 20-105; 20-3002; K.S.A. 1986 Supp. 22-3707.
Author: Robert T. Stephan
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category :
Languages : en
Pages :
Get Book Here
Book Description
Since it is the client's intent which governs the distinction between privileged and non-privileged communications, a determination of whether or not information exchanged between attorney and client is privileged requires a case-by-case consideration. To ensure compliance with the dictates of Canon 4 of the Code of Professional Responsibility and K.S.A. 60-426, when a supervising agency requests that an attorney release particular client information for enumerative or evaluative purposes, the attorney may either obtain the client's consent to do so, or, if the client refuses, compile the requested data in a less intrusive manner. If, however, the agency requests the data for purposes of determining a client's financial eligibility onto satisfy funding requirements, the exception to the privilege under DR-4-101(C)(4) would apply, making the aforementioned precautions unnecessary. Cited herein: K.S.A. 45-217; 45-221; 60-426; K.S.A. 1986 Supp. 20-3100, Supreme Court Rule No. 225, D.R. 4-101.
Author: Robert T. Stephan
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category :
Languages : en
Pages :
Get Book Here
Book Description
Under the provisions of Article 3, section 5 of the Kansas Constitution, no member of the Supreme Court Nominating Commission shall, while he or she is a member, hold any other "public office" by appointment. The term "public office" refers to the common-law concept of a public office, and except where the office of city attorney has been stripped of all prosecutorial and other sovereign power (through the exercise of home rule powers), a city attorney holds a public office. Cited herein: Kan. Const., Article 3, section 5.
Author: Robert T. Stephan
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category :
Languages : en
Pages :
Get Book Here
Book Description
To be consistent with requirements of the United States Constitution, the provisions of K.S.A. 72-5393 can, and must, be construed as neither requiring nor authorizing the provision of therapeutic psychological and speech and hearing services, at public expense and by public employees, on parochial school premises. Instead, said provisions must be construed as requiring that such services be provided at the "truly religiously neutral locations" specified in the statute, i.̲e̲.̲, in the public schools of the school district, in public centers, or in mobile units located off the parochial school premises. Cited herein: K.S.A. 72-5392, 73-5393, U.S. Const., Amend. I, XIV.
Author: Robert T. Stephan
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category :
Languages : en
Pages :
Get Book Here
Book Description
The statutory and regulatory scheme found in K.S.A. 1986 Supp. 55-609(c), 55-711(c) and K.A.R. 82-3-206 imposes an assessment to pay the conservation division expenses and administrative costs. Under this scheme the first purchaser pays the assessment and deducts it from payment of production to producers and royalty owners. Generally, as a matter of federal constitutional law, the federal government and Indian tribes are exempt from state taxation absent congressional consent. In our judgment there is implicit consent to tax the federal government in 30 U.S.C. sections 189 which authorizes a tax against a lessee of the federal government. This federal statute has been interpreted by the U.S. Supreme Court to authorize the tax against the lessee "as if the government were not concerned." There is also congressional authorization to tax the mineral interests of Indian tribes if the interests result from a lease issued to a non-Indian lessee pursuant to the 1924 Act found in 25 U.S.C. sections 398. However, this authorization does not exist in the Indian Mineral Leasing Act of 1938 found in 25 U.S.C. sections 396a. Therefore Indian mineral interests resulting from a lease issued to a non-Indian lessee pursuant to the 1924 Act are not exempt and those pursuant to the 1938 Act are exempt from the statutory and regulatory scheme in question. Cited herein: K.S.A. 1986 Supp. 55-609, 55-711, U.S. Const., Art. IV, sections 3, cl. 2; 30 U.S.C. sections 189, 25 U.S.C. sections 396a; 398.
Author: Curt Thomas Schneider
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category :
Languages : en
Pages :
Get Book Here
Book Description
The validity of 1978 Senate Concurrent Resolution No. 1640, which purports to rescind, effective March 22, 1979, 1972 House Concurrent Resolution No. 1155, conditional upon the failure of three fourths of the states to ratify the proposed equal rights amendment, may be determined only by the United States Congress, when and if three fourths of the states have passed resolutions ratifying said amendment.
