affirming trial court’s ruling that transfer of photos was incidental to nontaxable creative service of photography
How later courts described this case
- affirming trial court’s ruling that transfer of photos was incidental to nontaxable creative service of photography
- “[W]e have not been asked to revisit their holdings.”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
MOORE, Judge,
concurring specially.
I concur only because I am constrained by § 12-8-16, Ala.Code 1976 (“The decisions of the Supreme Court shall govern the holdings and decisions of the courts of appeals.... ”), and the doctrine of stare decisis as to the construction of § 40-23-2(1), Ala.Code 1976. See Moore v. Prudential Residential Servs. Ltd. P’ship, 849 So.2d 914, 926 (Ala.2002).