holding that sales made to contractor who builds roads for the state are not sales to the state and therefore are not exempt
How later courts described this case
- holding that sales made to contractor who builds roads for the state are not sales to the state and therefore are not exempt
- “[C]ontractors are consumers ... because they are the last persons in the chain to deal with such products before incorporation into a separate entity and before such products lost their identity as such.”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
LARSON, Justice
(concurring).
I am uncertain whether the opinion of Mr. Justice WOLFE is to be interpreted as disapproving the rule laid down in
Western Leather & Finding Co.
v.
State Tax Commission,
87 Utah 227 , 48 P. 2d 526 , or whether it is intended to reaffirm the doctrine therein laid down and distinguish this case from that one. I am unable to see any logical distinction or any sound or reasonable basis for distinguishing the two cases. I have always thought the Western Leather case unsound. If the holding in that case is still to
*523
stand as a correct statement of the law then the conclusions reached by Mr. Justice WOLFE, in the present case are unsound. It is because I think the decision in this cáse by necessary implication overrules and disapproves the Western Leather case that I concur herein.