Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
You’ll need to abide by a few key rules when using the SEPP strategy, according to IRS Section 72 (t): SEPP payments must be substantially equal, meaning they cannot fluctuate or you may lose ...
Substantially equal periodic payments. Substantially equal periodic payments (SEPP) are one of the exceptions in the United States Internal Revenue Code that allows a retiree to receive payments before age 59 from a retirement plan or deferred annuity without the 10% early distribution penalty under certain circumstances. [1]
Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., 550 U.S. 618 (2007), is an employment discrimination decision of the Supreme Court of the United States. [1] The result was that employers could not be sued under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 over race or gender pay discrimination if the claims were based on decisions made by the employer 180 days or more before the claim.
United States (1923) Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993), is a United States Supreme Court case determining the standard for admitting expert testimony in federal courts. In Daubert, the Court held that the enactment of the Federal Rules of Evidence implicitly overturned the Frye standard; the standard that the ...
Old Chief v. United States, 519 U.S. 172 (1997), discussed the limitation on admitting relevant evidence set forth in Federal Rule of Evidence 403. Under this rule, otherwise relevant evidence may be excluded if the probative value of the evidence is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, misleading the jury, or considerations of undue delay ...
Unfair prejudice in United States evidence law may be grounds for excluding relevant evidence. [1] ". Unfair prejudice" as used in Rule 403 is not to be equated with testimony that is simply adverse to the opposing party. [2] Virtually all evidence is prejudicial or it is not material. The prejudice must be "unfair".
Equal Access to Justice Act. In the United States of America, the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA) authorizes the payment of attorney's fees to a prevailing party in an action against the United States absent a showing by the government that its position in the underlying litigation "was substantially justified".
United States v. Scheffer, 523 U.S. 303 (1998), was the first case in which the Supreme Court issued a ruling with regard to the highly controversial matter of polygraph, or "lie-detector," testing. At issue was whether the per se exclusion of polygraph evidence offered by the accused in a military court violates the Sixth Amendment right to ...