About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

LOG IN
LOG IN


Case Citations [i] (Spring 2026)

handle is hein.ali/rethrida0145 and id is 1 raw text is: THE AMERICAN LAW INSTITUTE Spring 2026 Citations AGENCY 3D Generally C.A.9, 2025. Cit. generally in case cit. in sup. Suspected leader of a terrorist organization, who was detained as an enemy combatant by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), filed claims under the Alien Tort Statute against psychologists who designed and implemented an experimental program of enhanced interrogation techniques amounting to torture for the CIA, seeking damages for injuries he suffered during his detention and interrogations. The district court granted defendants' motion to dismiss. This court affirmed, holding that it lacked jurisdiction under the Military Commissions Act (MCA), because defendants were agents of the CIA who were authorized to detain and interrogate plaintiff on its behalf. In finding that an agency relationship existed between defendants and the CIA, the court noted that it looked to the Restatement Third of Agency, which restated the common law of agency the year the MCA was enacted and was the most current articulation of agency law. Husayn v. Mitchell, 142 F.4th 667, 675. Ohio, 2025. Cit. in case cit. generally in disc. Taxpayer that operated a business under which it provided food, labor, and miscellaneous materials to clients in multiple industries, filed an action challenging the tax commissioner's finding that taxpayer did not meet Ohio's commercial-activity tax statute's gross- receipts exclusion requirements and was not entitled to a refund. The board of tax appeals affirmed the tax commissioner's denial of taxpayer's request for refund. This court affirmed, holding that taxpayer did n ot qualify for the tax refund, because it was not an agent of its management-fee contract clients within the meaning of the statute. The court noted that decisions involving the statute's agency exclusion needed to focus on the statutory definition of agent, rather than a showing of actual authority on the part of the taxpayer within the meaning of the Restatement Third of Agency, for the taxpayer to qualify for the exclusion. Aramark Corporation v. Harris, 266 N.E.3d 873, 879. CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTORY MATTERS TOPIC 1. DEFINITIONS AND TERMINOLOGY § 1.01 Agency Defined COPYRIGHT C2026 By THE AMERICAN LAW INSTITUTE All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America For earlier citations, see the Appendices, Supplements, or Pocket Parts, if any, that correspond to the subject matter under examination.