Case law

Westfield Golf Practice Center, LLC v. Washington Township Assessor

859 N.E.2d 396 · Indiana Tax Court · Jan 5, 2007

STANDARD OF REVIEW This Court gives great deference to final determinations of the Indiana Board when it acts within the seope of its authority. Wittenberg Lutheran Vill Endowment Corp. v. Lake County Prop. … See Eckerling v. Wayne Twp.

Carroll v. Hunt

168 S.W.2d 238 · Texas Commission of Appeals · Jan 20, 1943

In Browne v. King, 111 Tex. 330 , 235 S. W. 522, 523 , D. F. and J. A. Acebo, who claimed to own certain land, executed a power of attorney by which they authorized W. H. … Co. v.

Rice, Edward v. Hospice Source, LLC

2021 TN WC 167 · Tennessee Court of Workers' Compensation Claims · Mar 25, 2021

See Roberson v. Loretto Casket, 722 S.W.2d 380, 383 (Tenn.1986). … The Workers’ Compensation Judge must approve the statement before the record is submitted to the Appeals Board.

Mayfield Green Cooperative, Inc. v. Joseph P. O'Connor, Marion County Assessor

Indiana Tax Court · Jan 20, 2015

The second requirement, that a case be an initial appeal of the Indiana Board’s final determination, includes the exhaustion of administrative remedies requirement. See State Bd. of Tax Comm’rs v. … See Johnson v.

In Re Pozen S'holders Litig.

2005 NCBC 7 · North Carolina Business Court · Nov 10, 2005

challenges a specific action of the board of direcors, Delaware courts apply the two-prong test set forth in Aronson v. … Grobow v.

Aster Agency, Inc. v. State

12 Misc. 2d 44 · New York Court of Claims · Jul 30, 1958

(Allen v. Brown, 44 N. Y. 228 ; Meeker v. Claghorn, 44 N. Y. 349 ; Sheridan v. Mayor etc., of New York, 68 N. Y. 30 ; Brown v. Powers, 53 App. Div. 251 .) … (Thellusson v. State of New York, 176 Misc. 301 .)

Sanderson v. Saia Motor Freight Lines, Inc.

North Carolina Industrial Commission · Jul 13, 2009

Brown III. 12. Dr. Brown's medical records prior to August 8, 2005 relate Plaintiff's condition and work restrictions to Plaintiff's right foot injury, not a right calf rash. 13. Plaintiff provided Mr. … Russell v. Lowes Prod. Distribution , 108 N.C. App. 762 , 765 , 425 S.E.2d 454 , 457 (1993). 3.

Texas & P. Ry. Co. v. Van Zandt

44 S.W.2d 950 · Texas Commission of Appeals · Jan 6, 1932

After an hour or so Brown and I then agreed to come to $1250.00. … Ry. of Texas v.

Charwood LLC v. Bartholomew County Assessor

906 N.E.2d 946 · Indiana Tax Court · May 14, 2009

Oil, Inc. v. Madison Twp. Assessor, 818 N.E.2d 1006 (Ind. Tax Ct.2004); Lindeman v. Wood, 799 N.E.2d 1230 (Ind. Tax Ct.2003); Wetzel Enter. v. State Bd. of Tax Comm'rs, 694 NE2d 1259 (Ind. Tax Ct.1998); Kent Co. v. … To facilitate review of the matter, the Indiana Board subsequently consolidated the Petitioners' appeals. (See Pet'rs V.

Opinion No. (2001)

Oklahoma Attorney General Reports · Apr 5, 2001

Summey v. … .; see also Excise Bd. v. Sch. Dist.

Rector, Wardens & Vestrymen of Christ Church in Short Hills v. Township of Millburn

26 N.J. Misc. 123 · New Jersey Tax Court · Feb 24, 1948

State Board of Tax Appeals, 131 N. J. L. 57; 34 Atl. Rep. (2d) 740; Trenton v. State Board of Tax Appeals, supra. … To the same effect is Stevens Institute v. State Board of Taxes and Assessments, in 3 N. J. Mis. R. 1094; 130 Atl. Rep. 925 , decided in 1925.

Eckerling v. Wayne Township Assessor

841 N.E.2d 674 · Indiana Tax Court · Feb 2, 2006

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. … Cope An. § 33—26—6—6(e)(1) (5) (West 2006) The pafiy‘seeking to overturn the Indiana Board's final determination bears the burden of proving its invalidity. Osolo Twp. v.

Opinion No. (2006)

Oklahoma Attorney General Reports · Mar 28, 2006

Nixon v. Roberts, 420 P.2d 898 , 903 (Okla. 1966); see McConnell v. … Nixon v. Roberts, 420 P.2d 898 , 903 (Okla. 1966); Heisler v. Thomas, 651 P.2d 1330 , 1331 (Okla. 1982). 3.

Collins, Randall v. Allsouth Appliance Group, Inc.

2026 TN WC 20 · Tennessee Court of Workers' Compensation Claims · Mar 12, 2026

In Cook v. Newton Nissan of Gallatin/Newton Ford, LLC, 2023 TN Wrk. Comp. App. Bd. … The Court Clerk will prepare the record for submission to the Appeals Board, and you will receive notice once it has been submitted.

S. Axelrod Co. v. Mel Dixon Studio, Inc.

122 Misc. 2d 770 · Civil Court of the City of New York · Oct 7, 1983

The Loft Board may only apply the policy declared by the Loft Law and the rules and standards laid down in that statute. (See Matter of Small v *777 Moss, 279 NY, at p 297 ; cf. … (Matter of Small v Moss, 279 NY, at pp 298-299.) The adoption of a primary residence requirement by the" Loft Board is thus in derogation of article 7-C.

ARP Realty Associates v. Washington Borough

16 N.J. Tax 281 · New Jersey Tax Court · Jan 13, 1997

In Veeder v. … Realty Assocs. v.

Borough of Wanaque v. North Jersey District Water Supply Commission

20 N.J. Misc. 232 · New Jersey Tax Court · Jun 2, 1942

Rep. 35 ; Borough of Haworth v. State Board of Tax Appeals (Supreme Court, 1941), 127 N. J. L. 67; 21 Atl. … Stevens Institute v. State Board (Supreme Court, 1928), 105 N. J. L. 99; 143 Atl. Rep. 356 ; affirmed, Ibid. 655; 146 Atl. Rep. 919 ; Hackensack Water Co. v. State Board of Tax Appeals (Supreme Court, 1939), 122 N. J.

People v. Guaman

51 Misc. 3d 792 · Criminal Court of the City of New York · Jan 25, 2016

Mere conclusory allegations of ultimate facts are insufficient to warrant a hearing (see People v Brown, 56 NY2d 242, 246-247 [1982]; see also People v Broxton, 34 AD3d 491, 492 [2006]). … Brown, 56 NY2d at 246-247 ; People v Session, 34 NY2d at 256 ; People v Coleman, 37 AD3d 491 [2007]; People v Broxton, 34 AD3d at 492 ; People v LaPella, 185 AD2d 861, 862 [1992]).”

Smith v. Raymond

2010 NCBC 18 · North Carolina Business Court · Oct 21, 2010

Smith v. Raymond, 2010 NCBC 18. … Stepak v. Dean, 434 A.2d 388, 390 (Del. Ch. 1981).

Fitzgerald v. State

10 Misc. 2d 1046 · New York Court of Claims · May 2, 1958

(Cuglar v. Power Auth. of State of N. Y., 3 N Y 2d 1006.) There were two appropriations. The first, as shown on Map No. 322, Parcel No. 325, St. Lawrence River Project, St. … (United States v. Miller, 3. 17 U. S. 369 .) *1050 Both parties hereto have used expert witnesses to establish their contentions.