Case law

Weber v. State

104 Misc. 2d 947 · New York Court of Claims · Jun 20, 1980

In O’Rourke v Long ( 41 NY2d 219 ), the court held that if a case was likely to fall within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Workers’ Compensation Board (Board), plaintiff bore the burden of pleading and proving the absence … Although the court remains a "jurisdictionally competent forum” to determine the applicability of compensation until a proceeding is commenced before the Board (see Takacs v Food Stop Markets, 61 AD2d 917 ), we believe that

Heart City Chrysler/Lockmandy Motors v. Department of Local Government Finance

801 N.E.2d 215 · Indiana Tax Court · Jan 12, 2004

ANALYSIS AND OPINION Standard of Review This Court gives great deference to the final determinations of the State Board when it acts within the scope of its authority. Hamstra Builders, Inc. v. … On April 24, 1998, this Court issued an opinion in Clark v. State Board of Tax Commissioners, 694 N.E.2d 1230 (Ind. Tax Ct.1998).

People v. Kozak

56 Misc. 2d 337 · Criminal Court of the City of New York · Mar 28, 1968

(United States v. Brown, 274 F. Supp. 561, 563 .) Such a determination may also be made in a civil proceeding (Kingsley Books v. Brown, 354 U. S. 436 ). … (United States v. Brown, supra, p. 565.) The rules outlined above apply equally to so-called ‘ ‘ hardcore pornography.”

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.

North Brunswick Township v. Gochal

27 N.J. Tax 31 · New Jersey Tax Court · Dec 10, 2012

Following a hearing before the Board, the Board issued a judgment reducing the assessment as follows: Land $100,000 Improvement $207,500 Total $307,500 The Township appealed that judgment. *33 Judgments of county boards of … As explained in Murnick v.

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.

Tolentino v. Oxford Township

4 N.J. Tax 173 · New Jersey Tax Court · Feb 1, 1982

Effective July 1, 1979 this time period was amended to require filing an appeal complaint “within 45 days of service of the judgment of the county board.” In Evesham Tp. v. Nye, 3 N.J. … The statutory requirements for the filing of appeals from judgments of county boards of taxation are strictly construed and they must be filed in a timely fashion. See Newark v.

Asberry, Whitney Rae v. Cummins Filtration

2022 TN WC 2 · Tennessee Court of Workers' Compensation Claims · Jan 14, 2022

Armstrong v. Chattanooga Billiard Club, 2020 TN Wrk. Comp. App. Bd. LEXIS 40, at *10 (Jan. 21, 2020). … To appeal to the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board, you must: 1.

Bosamia v. Marion County Assessor

969 N.E.2d 635 · Indiana Tax Court · Jun 19, 2012

of Appeals v. … See e.g., Whittaker v. Dail, 584 N.E.2d 1084, 1087 (Ind.1992); Shane v. Home Depot USA, Inc., 869 N.E.2d 1232, 1235-36 (Ind.Ct.App.2007); Flying J, Inc. v. Jeter, 720 N.E.2d 1247, 1249-50 (Ind.Ct.App.1999).

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.

Clapa v. Multnomah County Assessor

Oregon Tax Court · May 21, 2012

Jeffrey Brown (Brown), Real Property Appraiser, Multnomah County Oregon, Division of Assessment, Recording & Taxation, appeared on behalf of Defendant. … The Multnomah County Board of Property Tax Appeals Order, dated March 4, 2011, determined a real market value of $165,340 for Account R175194.

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).

Gugler v. Baker County Education Service District

10 Or. Tax 315 · Oregon Tax Court · Nov 26, 1986

Where judgment must be exercised by the administrative board or body, the questioned decision must fall into the area of unreasonable before the court will overturn it. Rogue River Pack. v. … Stasher v. Harger-Haldeman, 58 Cal *327 2d 23, 372 P2d 649, 652 (1962), quoted in Dept. of Rev. v. Umatilla County, 10 OTR 309 (1986).

Carney v. Ohio Dept. of Rehab. & Corr.

2022 Ohio 1599 · Ohio Court of Claims · Mar 28, 2022

As stated in Brown v. … Brown, 10th District No. 13AP-804, 2014-Ohio-1810 at ¶ 15.

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 Dana Prieto, Oklahoma State Senate, District 34

2024 OK AG 6 · Oklahoma Attorney General Reports · Apr 26, 2024

COM'RS Discussed at Length 1924 OK 396 , 231 P. 250 , 104 Okla. 260 , BOARD OF COM'RS OF TULSA COUNTY v. NEWS-DISPATCH PRINT Discussed 2010 OK 5 , 237 P.3d 134 , ESTATE OF CROWELL v. … F.O.P., Lodge No. 188 v. Board of County Commissioners of Tulsa Co. Discussed at Length 1982 OK 133 , 658 P.2d 464 , Summey v. Tisdale Discussed at Length 1951 OK 262 , 236 P.2d 987 , 205 Okla. 233 , JOHNSTON v.

Borough of Rumson v. Peckham

7 N.J. Tax 539 · New Jersey Tax Court · Aug 15, 1985

Co. v. Newark, 10 N.J. 99 , 89 A.2d 385 (1952); Passaic v. … Accordingly, the appeals were dismissed and the county board judgment was sustained. Similarly, in Inmar Associates, Inc. v.

Toone v. City of Camden

19 N.J. Misc. 600 · New Jersey Tax Court · Sep 9, 1941

In view of the foregoing, we need not reflect upon the propriety of the reversals by the county board of its prior determinations. But see City of Newark v. … Stevens Institute v. State Board (Supreme Court, 1928), 105 N. J. L. 99; 143 Atl. Rep. 356 ; C. F. Mueller Co. v. State Board of Tax Appeals (Supreme Court, 1941), 126 N. J. L. 141; 18 Atl. Rep. (2d) 564.

Amerson v. Johnston Cty. Bd of Educ.

North Carolina Industrial Commission · Nov 29, 2000

Defendant, Johnston County Board of Education, is a State agency and Linda Harris was an employee of the defendant at the time of the alleged negligence. 4. … On 20 April 1998 Sunny Hill Road was part of the regular bus route set by the Johnston County Board of Education. Ms.