Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

FiltersSS

2,596 results

1.08s

  • Commonwealth v. Dandridge

    2 Va. 408 · General Court of Virginia · Jun 15, 1824

    According to my construction of Blackstone, the persons of the Judges in or out of Court, when acting in their Judicial’.capacity, are clearly privileged. Why? … Bj these authorities, the following principles seem to be clearly and unquestionably established. 1.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Aldridge v. Metro. Life Ins. Co.

    2019 NCBC 49 · North Carolina Business Court · Aug 15, 2019

    In 1999, Siskey assisted MetLife in forming and establishing Wall Street Capitol as MetLife’s branch office in Charlotte, North Carolina. (J. Aldridge Compl. ¶ 14.) … Our Supreme Court has held that to qualify as a special duty under Barger, the duty must be “personal to” Plaintiffs. Green v.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Commonwealth v. Dandridge

    2 Va. 408 · General Court of Virginia · Jun 15, 1824

    According to my construction of Blackstone, the persons of the Judges in or out of Court, when acting in their Judicial’.capacity, are clearly privileged. Why? … Bj these authorities, the following principles seem to be clearly and unquestionably established. 1.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Commonwealth v. Dandridge

    2 Va. 408 · General Court of Virginia · Jun 15, 1824

    According to my construction of Blackstone, the persons of the Judges in or out of Court, when acting in their Judicial’.capacity, are clearly privileged. Why? … Bj these authorities, the following principles seem to be clearly and unquestionably established. 1.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • H&M Bay, Inc. v. Dir., Div. of Taxation

    New Jersey Tax Court · Dec 21, 2023

    . § 381 (1959), confers immunity on plaintiff from taxes under the CBT Act. In addition, plaintiff maintains that it does not have a taxable nexus in New H & M Bay, Inc. v. … Moreover, an examination of defendant’s regulations further reveals that when a foreign corporation “engages in contacts within New Jersey . . . regardless of whether it has formally qualified or is authorized to do business

    Cited 0 timesUnpublished
  • Kingsdown, Inc. v. Hinshaw

    2016 NCBC 16 · North Carolina Business Court · Feb 17, 2016

    shall be paid . . . only after a determination that the Director or Indemnified Officer . . . did not act in a manner, at the time the activities were taken, that was known or reasonably should have been known . . . to be clearly … Although someone cannot preface an otherwise defamatory statement with ‘in my opinion’ and claim immunity from liability, a pure expression of opinion is protected because it fails to assert actual fact.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Winn v. Dept. of Rev.

    Oregon Tax Court · Jul 29, 2019

    ORS 316.007(1).9 In general, terms have “the same meaning as when used in a comparable context in the laws of the United States relating to federal income taxes, unless a different meaning is clearly required or the term … Items that may have qualified as repairs became part of a larger plan to improve the basement unit. The expenses Plaintiff incurred in 2013 for the basement unit must be capitalized.

    Cited 0 timesUnpublished
  • Linstrom v. Lincoln County Assessor

    Oregon Tax Court · Nov 16, 2018

    It is not buildable and does not qualify for a septic permit. (Ptf’s Ex 8 at 1.) … On the one hand, the subject property deeds clearly state that the property boundary extends only to the high water line.11 That supports Defendant’s view that Plaintiff knew what he bought when he bought it.

    Cited 0 timesUnpublished
  • Gray v. Linn County Assessor

    Oregon Tax Court · Jan 9, 2018

    For purposes of the state cost factors, Tracy determined the pole barn’s construction quality and design features—such as its concrete slab floor—qualified it as a class 5 general purpose building. … While Defendant did not establish that its trending was correct, the burden of proving a change to the tax roll falls on /// FINAL DECISION TC-MD 170092G

    Cited 0 timesUnpublished
  • Rogers v. Dept. of Rev.

    Oregon Tax Court · Sep 20, 2016

    Looking at the guidelines in the federal regulations for the nine factors set out above, Plaintiffs clearly meet the second and third factors, do not appear to satisfy the first, sixth, or seventh, and may or may not satisfy … That said, the court need not determine whether Plaintiffs qualify under IRC section 183 because they have failed to provide any evidence, documentary or testimonial, pertaining to the claimed expenses.

    Cited 0 timesUnpublished
  • In Re Lokuta

    964 A.2d 988 · Court of Judicial Discipline of Pennsylvania · Dec 9, 2008

    The testimony set out in the Discussion above so clearly establishes such astonishing, recurrent violations of Canon 3A.(3) that anything we might say about it would be superfluous. … The facts so clearly establish a violation of Canon 3A.(3) we will not say more — we need not. 2.

    Cited 12 timesPublished
  • H. Scott Gurvey by Amy R. Gurvey Esq. v. Montclair Twp.

    New Jersey Tax Court · May 10, 2017

    However, the task sought to be performed by the writ must be certain, clearly established, indisputable and imperative. See Kerr v. United States District Court, 426 U.S. 394, 402-403, 96 S. Ct. 2119, 2123-2124, 48 L. … Nonetheless, plaintiffs’ motion fails to establish any basis warranting relief under R. 4:50- 1.

    Cited 0 timesUnpublished
  • ABC Inc. v. Dept. of Rev.

    Oregon Tax Court · Apr 22, 2020

    For example, Plaintiff observes that the corporations composing its Parks and Resorts segment are clearly not broadcasters. … Plaintiff clearly engages in interstate broadcasting.

    Cited 0 timesUnpublished
  • Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Dept. of Rev.

    Oregon Tax Court · Apr 14, 2021

    The trader agrees to an arrangement with a qualified broker (or the clearinghouse) to provide him with a margin deposit as required, and also agrees to reimburse him or accept credit for all interim gains … or losses in value of that futures contract resulting from day-to- day changes in its price on the floor of the established commodity exchange.

    Cited 0 timesUnpublished
  • Davis v. Dept. of Rev.

    Oregon Tax Court · Apr 8, 2020

    That increase in value—presumably at least partly due to Plaintiffs’ work irrigating, establishing new pastures, and otherwise operating the ranch—counterbalanced an increasing proportion of Plaintiffs’ yearly operating … It is immaterial whether Plaintiffs’ hope for profit was reasonable; their intent qualifies their ranching expenses as business expenses. See Treas Reg § 1.183–2(a). III.

    Cited 0 timesUnpublished
  • Patrick v. State

    11 Misc. 3d 296 · New York Court of Claims · Dec 5, 2005

    He was certified as a master trainer in SCIP in 1984, and remains so qualified in SCIP-R. To this day, he continues to conduct SCIP-R training courses for voluntary agencies and school districts. Mr. … While the developmental aides here were clearly troubled by what transpired, and the court does not find that they intended to cause Billy’s death, they were ill-equipped to deal with the events as they unfolded.

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Comcast Corp. II v. Dept. of Rev. (TC 5265)

    24 Or. Tax 250 · Oregon Tax Court · Nov 25, 2020

    The Court’s only post-Allied-Signal opinion to discuss the concept of “operational function” apportion- able income does not break new ground in the substantive issue here, but it clearly delineates the concepts that may … The department seems to argue that its adjustments to taxpayer’s carryforward deductions are immune from challenge by taxpayer because the department was at a procedural disadvantage until taxpayer sought to carry forward

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Tillery Envtl. v. A&D Holdings, Inc.

    2018 NCBC 12 · North Carolina Business Court · Feb 9, 2018

    Buyer has clearly stated a claim for secondary liability against Weidenhammer under either subsection of 78A-56(c). … This language does not clearly indicate whether “reasonable detail” modifies “the basis of such Claim” alone or both requirements, i.e., “the basis of such Claim and the amount sought.” 152.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Marina District Development Co. v. City of Atlantic City

    27 N.J. Tax 469 · New Jersey Tax Court · Oct 18, 2013

    The resulting impact on revenue at the Borgata was established at trial. … Over the municipality’s objection, he was qualified as an expert in the appraisal of real estate and the appraisal of casino-hotels.

    Cited 19 timesPublished
  • Stanislaus Food Products Corp v. Director, Div. of Taxation

    New Jersey Tax Court · Apr 23, 2021

    The taxpayer filed amended returns indicating it qualified as a P.L. 86-272 taxpayer, thus exempting it from a net income tax such as the CBT. … Agreeing that the taxpayer qualified as a P.L 86-272 entity for 2012 through 2014, the Director allowed a refund of the CBT.

    Cited 0 timesUnpublished

Ask Donna

Ask Donna

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.