Philadelphia's tax on soda upheld by state Supreme Court
Legal Issues
Pennsylvania's highest court is upholding Philadelphia's tax on soda and other sweetened drinks, rejecting a challenge by merchants and the beverage industry.
The Supreme Court ruled Wednesday the 1.5-cent-per-ounce levy is aimed at distributors and dealer-level transactions and does not illegally duplicate another existing tax.
Both dissenting justices say the tax does duplicate taxes already in place on retail sales of soda in the city.
The beverage tax raised nearly $79 million in 2017, over its first 12 months in place. If fully passed on to consumers, the soda tax represents an increase of $1.44 on a six-pack of 16-ounce bottles.
Philadelphia Mayor Jim Kenney, a Democrat, hailed the ruling.
Related listings
-
Hawaii Supreme Court sides with lesbian couple in B&B case
Legal Issues 07/11/2018A Hawaii appeals court ruling that a bed and breakfast discriminated by denying a room to two women because they're gay will stand after the state's high court declined to take up the case.Aloha Bed & Breakfast owner Phyllis Young had argued she ...
-
Audit: 'Pervasive lack of accountability' in Kentucky courts
Legal Issues 07/09/2018In 2016, Kentucky's Administrative Office of the Courts was looking for office space for newly-elected Supreme Court Justice Sam Wright. They got two offers: One would cost more than $59,000 a year and require extensive renovations. The other space w...
-
Abortion rights supporters decry court ruling
Legal Issues 07/01/2018Abortion-rights supporters say the Supreme Court "turned its back on women" by striking down a California law requiring anti-abortion crisis pregnancy centers to provide information about abortion services.NARAL Pro-Choice America calls the pregnancy...
Grounds for Divorce in Ohio - Sylkatis Law, LLC
A divorce in Ohio is filed when there is typically “fault” by one of the parties and party not at “fault” seeks to end the marriage. A court in Ohio may grant a divorce for the following reasons:
• Willful absence of the adverse party for one year
• Adultery
• Extreme cruelty
• Fraudulent contract
• Any gross neglect of duty
• Habitual drunkenness
• Imprisonment in a correctional institution at the time of filing the complaint
• Procurement of a divorce outside this state by the other party
Additionally, there are two “no-fault” basis for which a court may grant a divorce:
• When the parties have, without interruption for one year, lived separate and apart without cohabitation
• Incompatibility, unless denied by either party
However, whether or not the the court grants the divorce for “fault” or not, in Ohio the party not at “fault” will not get a bigger slice of the marital property.