Account

Sign in to access your account and subscription

The DC Circuit Court's <i>Murphy</i> Ruling

A&amp;FP has for several years followed the problematic interaction of: Laws and regulations relating to the federal taxability as income of compensatory damages in 'nonphysical' personal injury cases; The classification of contingent at-torney fees in those cases as income for the client (as well as for the attorney); The operation of federal fee-shifting statutes; and The alternative minimum tax (AMT). '

11 minute read September 28, 2006 at 09:36 AM
By
Joe Danowsky
The DC Circuit Court's <i>Murphy</i> Ruling

A&FP has for several years followed the problematic interaction of:

This premium content is locked for Accounting and Financial Planning for Law Firms subscribers only

ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN Accounting and Financial Planning for Law Firms

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

Already have an account? Sign In Now

For enterprise-wide or corporate access, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or call 1-877-256-2473.

NOT FOR REPRINT

© 2026 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.

Continue Reading

The Copyright Royalty Board (CRB), which works under the umbrella of the Librarian of Congress, sets statutory-license royalty terms and rates. The U.S. Courts of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit recently issued two notable decisions about the CRB.

October 01, 2026