Case law

Kokomo Urban Development, LLC v. Mindy Heady, in her official capacity as Howard County Assessor

125 N.E.3d 15 · Indiana Tax Court · May 13, 2019

STANDARD OF REVIEW The party seeking to overturn an Indiana Board final determination bears the burden of demonstrating its invalidity. Osolo Twp. Assessor v. … Ass’n, Inc. v. Indiana Dep’t of State Revenue, 568 N.E.2d 578, 581 (Ind.

Cook v. Atlantic Industrial Constructors

North Carolina Industrial Commission · Jul 22, 1998

Brown, an orthopedic surgeon, and indicated that he did not recall any specific trauma. He never advised Dr. … G.S. § 97-2 (6); Anderson v. Northwestern Motor Company , 233 N.C. 372 , 64 S.E.2d 265 (1951). 2. Plaintiff is not entitled to benefits under the Workers' Compensation Act for his back condition.

In re the Appeals Filed by the City of Jersey City

23 N.J. Misc. 311 · New Jersey Tax Court · Sep 4, 1945

Park Ridge v. Board of Equalization of Taxes, 86 N. J. L. 39; 90 Atl. Rep. 1019 . … Kenilworth v. Board of Equalization of Taxes, 78 N. J. L.. 302; 72 Atl. Rep. 966 .

Township of Washington v. Warren County Tax Administrator

19 N.J. Tax 1 · New Jersey Tax Court · Mar 23, 2000

That a county board may use any “reasonable and efficient mode” of equalization was established in City of Passaic v. Passaic County Board of Taxation, 18 N.J. 371 , 113 A.2d 753 (1955). In Carteret Borough v. … In Woodbridge Township v.

Bear Creek Plaza, Ore., Ltd. v. Department of Revenue

12 Or. Tax 272 · Oregon Tax Court · Sep 17, 1992

Widmer, Inc. v. Dept. of Rev., 261 Or 371, 374 , 494 P2d 854 (1972) (quoting Citizens’ Nat. Bk. v. Board of Equalization, 109 Or 669 , 222 P 341 (1924)). … Although there is no definition of “parcel,” in First Interstate Bank v.

New York Susquehanna v. State Department of Treasury

6 N.J. Tax 575 · New Jersey Tax Court · Sep 21, 1984

Taxpayer also cites Lehigh Valley Railroad Co. v. Zinc, 136 N.J.L. 251 , 55 A.2d 237 (Sup.Ct.1947), and N.Y. Central R.R. Co. v. … Brunetti v. Borough of New Milford, 68 N.J. 576, 589 , 350 A.2d 19 (1975); Roadway Express, Inc. v. Kingsley, 37 N.J. 136, 141 , 179 A.2d 729 (1962); Naylor v. Harkins, 11 N.J. 435, 444 , 94 A.2d 825 (1953).

Rothenfluch v. Department of Revenue

11 Or. Tax 322 · Oregon Tax Court · Jan 3, 1990

Liquid Air Inc. v. Dept. of Rev., 8 OTR 159 (1979). … United States v. Winona & St. Peter R. Co., 165 US 463 , 17 S Ct 368 , 41 L Ed 789 (1897); United States v. California & Oregon Land Co., 148 US 31 , 13 S Ct 458 , 37 L Ed 354 (1893).

Wal Mart Stores, Inc. v. Wayne Township Assessor

825 N.E.2d 485 · Indiana Tax Court · Apr 8, 2005

ANALYSIS AND OPINION Standard of Review This Court gives great deference to final determinations of the Indiana Board. Wittenberg Lutheran Vill. Endowment Corp. v. Lake County Prop. … For the foregoing reasons, the Court AFFIRMS the final determination of the Indiana Board valuing Wal Mart's property for the 2001 tax year. *491 COM. v. WALKER Mass. 491 Cite as 825 N.E.2d 491 (Mass. 2003) 1 .

Bedford Apartments v. Jean

843 N.E.2d 78 · Indiana Tax Court · Mar 2, 2006

Bedford Apartments, LP (Bedford) appeals the final determination of the Indiana Board of Tax Review (Indiana Board) assessing its real property for the 2001 tax year. … See State v.

Question Submitted by: The Honorable Brian Guthrie, Oklahoma State Senate, District 25

2025 OK AG 4 · Oklahoma Attorney General Reports · Apr 23, 2025

See also Hirschfeld v. Okla. … Armstrong v. Ottawa County Board of Commissioners , --- N.W.3d ----, 2024 WL 292957, *3 (Mich. Ct. App.

Borough of Paramus v. County of Bergen

1 N.J. Tax 126 · New Jersey Tax Court · Jun 12, 1980

See Township of Delaware v. Assessors of Taxes, 53 N.J.L. 319 , 21 A. 938 (Sup.Ct.1891); Kenilworth v. Board of Equal, of Taxes, 78 N.J.L. 439 , 74 A. 480 (E. & A. 1909); Montclair v. … In Montclair v. State Board of Tax Appeals, supra, the Court stated: “. . .

Guthrie v. Summit Molded Products Inc.

North Carolina Industrial Commission · Sep 28, 1995

Plaintiff claims that Coaling Little and Butch Brown told her they were too busy to help her by opening the mold on November 29 or 30, 1993, but Mr. Brown and Mr. … Anderson v. Lincoln Constr. Co. , 265 N.C. 431 , 144 S.E.2d 272 (1965). 2.

Beta Steel Corp. v. Department of Local Government Finance

780 N.E.2d 439 · Indiana Tax Court · Dec 20, 2002

ANALYSIS AND OPINION Standard of Review This Court gives great deference to the final determinations of the State Board when it acts within the seope of its authority. Walker Mfg. Co. v. … See Centrium Group v. State Bd. of Tax Comm'rs, 599 N.E.2d 242, 243 (Ind. Tax Ct.199f2) (holding that the Court will reverse the State Board when it acts contrary to law).

Opinion No. (2007)

Oklahoma Attorney General Reports · Mar 9, 2007

county excise board. 68 O.S. 2001 , § 3004[ 68-3004 ]; Summey v. … See Cox v. Dawson, 911 P.2d 272 , 276 (Okla. 1996); Rapp v. Okla. Tax Comm'n, 27 P.2d 157 , 159 (Okla. 1933). 2.

In re the Application for Letters of Administration upon the Estate of McKeon

1 Mills Surr. 20 · New York Surrogate's Court · Feb 15, 1899

Kilbourne v. Board of Supervisors, 62 Hun, 210 . … Henderson v. Board of Supervisors, 147 N.

Galloway v. Lumbermen's Indemnity Exchange

238 S.W. 646 · Texas Commission of Appeals · Mar 22, 1922

This principle of law was announced by the Texarkana Court of Civil Appeals in Waterman Lumber Co. v. Beatty, 204. S. W. 448. In that case the injured employs sued the employer direct, and recovered judgment. … said final ruling and decision by -said board give notice to the adverse party and to the board that he will not abide by said final ruling and decision.

In Re Appeal of Larsen

571 Pa. 457 · United States Special Tribunals of Pennsylvania · Oct 24, 2002

Pursuant to Article V, Section 18(b)(5) of our constitution, the jurisdiction of the Court of Judicial Discipline attached upon the filing of the Board’s formal complaint. … The Board was created by a 1993 amendment to Article V, Section 18 of the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.

In re the Estate of Weil

151 Misc. 841 · New York Surrogate's Court · Jun 13, 1934

(Matter of Brown, 93 N. Y. 295, 300 ; Matter of Paton, 111 id. 480, 487; Prowitt v. Podman, 37 id. 42, 53, and cases cited; Pfender v. Depew, 136 App. Div. 636, 639 ; Matter of Tone, 186 id. 361, 365; affd., 226 N. … As is said in Matter of Brown ( 93 N.

New Amsterdam Casualty Co. v. Harrington

290 S.W. 726 · Texas Commission of Appeals · Feb 2, 1927

The notice of his injury given the Industrial Accident Board by Harrington states that he sustained the injury “while in the employ of Butler, Gragg, and Lynch, employers.” … Co. v. Smith, 88 Tex. 9 , 28 S. W. 931 , 30 S. W. 549 ; Maddox v. Summerlin, 92 Tex. 483 , 49 S. W. 1033 , 50 S. W. 567 ; Bank of Garwin v. Freeman, 107 Tex. 523 , 181 S. W. 187 .

Stewart v. Hamilton Township

7 N.J. Tax 368 · New Jersey Tax Court · Dec 21, 1984

State Board of Tax Appeals, 123 N.J.L. 350, 353 , 8 A.2d 819 (Sup.Ct.1939); and, the courts cannot arbitrarily expand their *373 scope, Galloway Tp. v. … Blackhawk Mining Co., Inc. v. Andrus, 711 F.2d 753 (9th Cir.1983); Rosewell v. LaSalle National Bank, 450 US. 503 [ 101 S.Ct. 1221 , 67 L.Ed.2d 464 ] (1981); District of Columbia v.