Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Access (1)
- Agricultural product (1)
- Agricultural tax law (1)
- Algae (1)
- Aquaculture (1)
-
- Ascophyllum nodosum (1)
- Beaches (1)
- Bell v. town of wells (1)
- Boat (1)
- Coast (1)
- Coastal (1)
- Commercial fishing (1)
- Commercial fishing activities (1)
- Common law (1)
- Eminent domain (1)
- Environmental sustainability (1)
- Farmland tax law (1)
- Federal taxation of patents (1)
- Fishing (1)
- Forest management (1)
- Fowling (1)
- Gulf of maine (1)
- Harvesting (1)
- High water mark (1)
- Hill v. lord (1)
- Holdfasts (1)
- IRC section 1235 (1)
- Intertidal vegetation growth management (1)
- Intertidal zone (1)
- Jus publicum (1)
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
Defining Fishing, The Slippery Seaweed Slope, Ross V. Acadian Seaplants Ltd., Rebecca P. Totten
Defining Fishing, The Slippery Seaweed Slope, Ross V. Acadian Seaplants Ltd., Rebecca P. Totten
Ocean and Coastal Law Journal
In Maine, the intertidal zone has seen many disputes over its use, access, and property rights. Recently, in Ross v. Acadian Seaplants, Ltd., the Maine Supreme Judicial Court, sitting as the Law Court, held that rockweed seaweed in the intertidal zone is owned by the upland landowner and is not part of a public easement under the public trust doctrine. The Court held harvesting rockweed is not fishing. This case will impact private and public rights and also the balance between the State's environmental and economic interests. This Comment addresses the following points: first, the characteristics of rockweed and the …
Cooper V. Commissioner: Give The Inventor A (Learned) Hand, Rebecca R. Dulik
Cooper V. Commissioner: Give The Inventor A (Learned) Hand, Rebecca R. Dulik
Maine Law Review
Among the Internal Revenue Code’s many rules are some taxpayer-friendly provisions that grant tax benefits. Section 1235 is one such provision, providing to an inventor preferential tax treatment for income from the sale or exchange of a patent. In Cooper v. Commissioner, although the taxpayer inventor satisfied § 1235’s requirements, the Ninth Circuit affirmed the Tax Court’s decision to deny the taxpayer § 1235’s benefits. This Note compares Cooper to other § 1235 cases and argues that Cooper was decided wrongly because of the application of the substance over form doctrine. The substance over form doctrine is overapplied in general …