High court rules for retired US marshal in W.Va. tax dispute
Law Journals
The Supreme Court said Wednesday that the state of West Virginia unlawfully discriminated against a retired U.S. marshal when it excluded him from a more generous tax break given to onetime state law enforcement officers.
The court ruled unanimously for retired marshal James Dawson.
West Virginia law exempts state law enforcement retirees, including former policemen and firefighters, from paying income tax on their retirement benefits. But retired U.S. Marshals Service employees such as Dawson haven’t been getting that tax advantage.
Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote that because there aren’t any significant differences between Dawson’s former job responsibilities and those of state law enforcement retirees, “we have little difficulty concluding” that West Virginia’s law unlawfully discriminates against Dawson under federal law.
West Virginia had argued that it wasn’t doing anything wrong and that Dawson was getting the same benefit, a $2,000 income tax exemption, that applies to virtually all retired federal, state and local employees in West Virginia. The state said that only a “surpassingly small” number people who participate in specific, state-managed retirement plans get the exemption Dawson wanted to claim.
The U.S. government had backed Dawson, who served in the U.S. Marshals Service from 1987 to his retirement in 2008. He led the Marshals Service in the Southern District of West Virginia for the past six years.
In 2013, he filed paperwork seeking to amend his tax returns for two years and claim the more favorable tax exemption. Dawson said the state owed him $2,174 for 2010 and $2,111 for 2011. State tax officials disagreed, so Dawson took his case to court.
Related listings
-
High court deciding fate of cross-shaped Maryland memorial
Law Journals 02/24/2019The Supreme Court this week is hearing a case challenging the location of a nearly 100-year-old, cross-shaped Maryland war memorial.Three area residents and the District of Columbia-based American Humanist Association argue the cross' location on pub...
-
Former Sen. Barringer to run for North Carolina high court
Law Journals 02/05/2019Candidates for the North Carolina Supreme Court continue to grow with two or three seats on the ballot next year due to Chief Justice Mark Martin's impending resignation.Former state Sen. Tamara Barringer of Cary told supporters Tuesday she would see...
-
Congo court poised to rule on presidential vote challenge
Law Journals 01/21/2019Congo's constitutional court is poised to rule on a challenge to the presidential election, with the government on Friday dismissing an unprecedented request by the African Union continental body to delay releasing the final results because of "serio...
Can my trucking injury case be filed in Illinois?
If you have been injured in a truck driving accident, you may be wondering whether your worker’s comp case can be filed in Illinois. For an injured truck driver, this is an important question to ask, as the jurisdiction of the case can end up having a big impact on your benefits.
There are three main scenarios in which the Illinois Worker’s Compensation Commission would have jurisdiction over a trucking injury:
-If the accident took place in Illinois, If the employer is principally located in Illinois, or If the contract for hire is in Illinois
This means that a truck driver whose home terminal is in Illinois can make a claim for workers comp benefits in Illinois even if they were injured while on the road in another State. It also means that truck drivers who get hurt while passing through Illinois can file a claim in Illinois, even if their employer is located in another state.
If you have been injured on the road, and you are unsure where and how to file your workers comp claim, call us at (312)-726-5567 to begin your consultation. We can advise you whether Illinois is the right state to file for you. We have handled well over 30,000 claims for injured workers throughout the state of Illinois.