THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SUPREME COURT Term October Session. No Everett Ashton, Inc. City of Concord
|
|
- June McCormick
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SUPREME COURT 2015 Term October Session No Everett Ashton, Inc. v. City of Concord MANDATORY APPEAL FROM ROCKINGHAM SUPERIOR COURT BRIEF OF THE NEW HAMPSHIRE MUNICIPAL ASSOCIATION AS AMICUS CURIAE New Hampshire Municipal Association Stephen C. Buckley, Legal Services Counsel NH Bar ID #335 Margaret M.L. Byrnes, Staff Attorney NH Bar ID # Triangle Park Drive P.O. Box 617 Concord, NH
2 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF AUTHORITIES... 2 STATEMENT OF FACTS AND OF THE CASE... 3 ARGUMENT... 4 I. The trial court s determination that the language of RSA 80:2-a and RSA 205-A:4-a, VII compelled the City to abate taxes on manufactured homes deemed to have no value is based upon an erroneous statutory construction II. The legislative history of RSA 205-A:4-a, VII and RSA 80:2-a does not support the trial court s interpretation of these statutes CONCLUSION
3 CASES TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Atwater v. Town of Plainfield, 160 N.H. 503 (2010)... 4, 5 Clare v. Town of Hudson, 160 N.H. 378 (2010)... 4 Green Meadows Mobile Homes, Inc. v. City of Concord, 156 N.H. 394 (2007)... 7 Property Portfolio Group LLC v. Town of Derry, 163 N.H. 754 (2012)... 4 Solid Waste Agency of N. Cook Cnty. V. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 531 U.S. 159 (2001).. 10 STATUTES RSA 80:2-a... 8 RSA Chapter 205-A... 5 RSA 205-A: RSA 205-A: RSA 205-A: RSA 205-A:4-a... 6 RSA 205-A:4-a, VII... 4, 6, 7, 8 RSA 205-A: RSA 205-A:13-b... 5 RSA 205-A: RSA 205-A: OTHER AUTHORITIES House Bill , 10 House Bill 232-FN House Bill 1212-FN TREATISES 3 Sutherland Statutory Construction 57:3 (7th ed.)
4 STATEMENT OF FACTS AND OF THE CASE The New Hampshire Municipal Association defers to the Statement of Facts and of the Case in the Brief of The City of Concord, and relies thereon. 3
5 ARGUMENT In accordance with The New Hampshire Municipal Association s assented-to motion for leave to appear and file a brief as amicus curiae, this brief addresses Question 1 only: Whether the trial court erred in interpreting RSA 80:2-a and RSA 205-A:4-a, VII to require municipalities to waive outstanding property taxes and issue a demolition permit when a manufactured housing park seeks to demolish a manufactured home that has been abandoned and does not have value. I. The trial court s determination that the language of RSA 80:2-a and RSA 205- A:4-a, VII compelled the City to abate taxes on manufactured homes deemed to have no value is based upon an erroneous statutory construction. The trial s court conclusion that RSA 205-A:4-a, VII mandates municipalities waive taxes on abandoned, valueless manufactured housing is based upon improper statutory construction. First, the trial court erroneously concluded that RSA 205-A:4-a, VII is ambiguous. The interpretation and application of a statute is, ultimately, a question of law which this Court reviews de novo. Atwater v. Town of Plainfield, 160 N.H. 503, 507 (2010). This Court will ascribe the plain and ordinary meanings to the words used in a statute, Id. at 508, neither considering what the legislature might have said nor adding language, and consulting legislative history only where the statutory language is ambiguous, see Clare v. Town of Hudson, 160 N.H. 378, (2010); see also Property Portfolio Group LLC v. Town of Derry, 163 N.H. 754, 758 (2012). The trial court concluded that because there are no factors in RSA 205-A:4-a, VII for the City Assessors Board to consider when deciding to waive the taxes, the statute is ambiguous, thus justifying the use of extrinsic factors to determine the meaning of the word may. Trial 4
6 Court Decision On Merits, Notice of Appeal, Add. 8. However, because the plain and ordinary meaning of the word may, rather than shall or must, clearly grants the City Assessors the discretion to grant a tax abatement, this manner of statutory construction deviates significantly from the rules of statutory construction. The form of the verb used in a statute, i.e., something may, shall or must be done, is the single most important textual consideration determining whether a statute is mandatory or directory. 3 Sutherland Statutory Construction 57:3 (7th ed.). As a consequence, the trial court s conclusion that, due to the fact the manufactured homes in question were deemed to have no value, the City Board of Assessors was compelled to grant the tax abatement to permit the issuance of the requested demolition permits directly contradicts the plain meaning of the statute and, therefore, cannot stand. Consequently, the judge s interpretation that a municipality is prohibited from withholding permission to move the manufactured home when it has no value is simply not supported by the plain language of the statute. Trial Court Decision On Merits, Notice of Appeal, Add. 9. Furthermore, the trial court erred by reading this one provision of the statute in isolation. It is an equally well-established rule of statutory construction that this Court will interpret statutes in the context of the overall statutory scheme and not in isolation, with the goal of applying the statutes in question in light of the legislature s intent in enacting them and in light of the policy sought to be advanced by the entire statutory scheme. Atwater, 160 N.H. at 508. RSA Chapter 205-A is entitled Regulation of Manufactured Housing Parks, and the sections therein are directed at managing the relationship between the owners of manufactured houses and the operators of manufactured housing parks. RSA 205-A:2 provides a list of prohibited conduct limiting the actions of manufactured park owners. RSA 205-A:3, RSA 205- A:4, and RSA 205-A:5 through :13-b regulate the manner of evictions and termination of 5
7 tenancies, address permissible charges and fees, and provide consumer protection regulations that shield manufactured home owners from predatory conduct by manufactured park owners. RSA 205-A:16 through 205-A:20 are all health and safety mandates that must be honored by park owners. RSA 205-A:21 through :24 mandate specific notice requirements to park tenants in the event of the sale of the park by the owner, and RSA 205-A:25 through :31 establishes the board of manufactured housing to manage disputes over parks rules. RSA 205-A:4-a, unlike the rest of RSA Chapter 205-A, regulates the financial relationship between park owners and lenders who assert liens on the sale of manufactured housing. Through this statutory scheme, lienholders can attain the status of eligible lienholder, which affords the right to receive notice about park rules, rent, and fees charged to owners, and imposes the duty to give notice of lien assignments. Eligible lienholders are also entitled to receive notice that their borrower is in arrears on park rent and other charges, and affords the opportunity to protect the collateral from eviction from the park by permitting the eligible lienholder to satisfy such arrearages. The statute also can effect a subordination of the eligible lienholders lien for the benefit of the park owner upon failure to give notice of a lien, failure to give notice of assignment, or refusal to assume the unit owner s obligation to make rent payments. Finally, a park owner may sell a manufactured home to recover rent and other charges due, including reasonable moving and storage charges, as if the park owner were a secured party selling collateral under the Uniform Commercial Code. Wedged into paragraph (VII) of RSA 205-A:4-a is the provision that a municipality may issue a statement that the manufactured housing may be relocated without the payment of the taxes assessed thereon as provided in RSA 80:2-a in the event the proceeds from the sale are insufficient to pay the full amount of the property tax outstanding. The immediately preceding 6
8 three sentences refer to the park owner s ability to sell manufactured housing, as a secured party under the Uniform Commercial Code, and effect a forced waiver of homestead rights by a unit owner who is in rental arrears by more than 60 days and who has apparently abandoned the premises. By asserting that this provision also creates a mandate on municipalities, the trial court read the section in isolation and without regard to context, obscuring the evident purpose of the statute. Accordingly, the trial court s statutory construction rests on unsound principles and should be overturned. II. The legislative history of RSA 205-A:4-a, VII and RSA 80:2-a does not support the trial court s interpretation of these statutes. The trial court concluded that the RSA 205-A:4-a, VII is ambiguous because it states that a tax assessor may waive the tax lien but does not provide any factors that the assessor must consider when determining whether to issue the waiver. As a result, the judge looked to the legislative history for clarification. Where the statutory language is ambiguous or where more than one reasonable interpretation exists, we review legislative history to aid in our analysis. Green Meadows Mobile Homes, Inc. v. City of Concord, 156 N.H. 394, , 934 A.2d 586, 588 (2007) (internal citations omitted). However, even assuming that the statutory construction is ambiguous, the legislative history supports the conclusion that there was never intended to be any mandate on municipalities to grant a waiver or allow manufactured housing to be moved without payment of property taxes. Furthermore, even if the statute is ambiguous for failure to state factors that must be considered when deciding to waive the taxes, the legislative history does not support the trial court s interpretation that RSA 205-A:4-a, VII requires municipalities to waive taxes on valueless, abandoned manufactured housing. 7
9 RSA 205-A:4, VII is directly linked to RSA 80:2-a. In 1995, House Bill 137 amended the language of both RSA 80:2-a and RSA 205-A:4, VII. The stated purpose of the bill was to clarify the procedure relative to taxation on abandoned manufactured housing units, allowing abandoned units to be relocated under certain circumstances when taxes have not been paid. App. 170 (emphasis added). This was important because, prior to HB 137, RSA 80:2-a allowed a taxable structure, including manufactured housing, to be moved only if the individual moving the structure possessed a receipted tax bill or a certificate that the taxes had been paid in full. Thus, municipalities did not have the option to allow manufactured housing with unpaid property taxes to be relocated. Therefore, RSA 80:2-a was amended, in part, to allow a person to move such a structure, upon proof of a statement signed by a majority of the board of selectmen or assessors that the same may be relocated without the payment of the assessed taxes. At the same time, RSA 205-A:4-a, VII was amended, in part, as follows: The board of selectmen or assessors of the city or town may issue a statement that the manufactured housing may be relocated without the payment of the taxes assessed thereon as provided in RSA 80:2-a in the event the proceeds from the sale are insufficient to pay the full amount of the property tax outstanding. (emphasis added). The legislative history reveals that the amendments came as a response to the onslaught of abandoned manufactured housing as a result of the recession in the early 1990s, as explained by Maura Carroll of the New Hampshire Municipal Association at a Committee on Public Affairs hearing on the bill: One of the issues that we ve looked at is you don t see activity in this area until you hit a recession and clearly in the last couple of years, we ve seen the results of the process of when manufactured housing and other homes have been lienable and are coming into tax deeds, and some of these homes have been in such shape that they were not able to be restored or sold and because they ve been abandoned, communities could not follow the 8
10 individuals to get the taxes repaid. There was some language that was taken out of 8:2-a (sic) that also tied the hands of local officials about allowing movement of these units off the lots they were on. App The New Hampshire Municipal Association supported the bill as a means of trying to work out a compromise in solving issues related to abandoned mobile homes and manufactured housing. App Carroll also categorized the amendments as correcting language in the previous form of the statute that tied the hands of local officials about allowing movement of these units off the lots they were on. App. 175 (emphasis added). In a separate hearing, Carroll also testified that the change to RSA 80:2-a sought to provide flexibility if home is abandoned. App. 195 (emphasis added). Furthermore, the testimony of Representative Metzger explicitly stated: The bill makes sure there is no mandate on the town. It allows park owners to sell abandoned homes, so as to recover taxes, and cost of selling. The home can then be moved. Key word is may. App. 194 (emphasis added). Finally, the committee report categorized the bill as follows: The committee believes that this bill would allow local authorities to keep property on the tax rolls and allow manufactured housing park owners to provide a suitable atmosphere for their clients and the local community. App. 221 (emphasis added). Despite the consistency in the testimony that the bill would not create any sort of mandate, the trial court s order apparently focused on one statement from the testimony from Representative Beverly Gage: Purpose of bill is to get the abandoned home off the lot and properly disposed of. App There is no doubt that the statute targeted the problems presented by immovability of abandoned homes under the previous version of the statutes. However, reading the legislative 9
11 history as a whole, it is clear that the purpose of the amended language was to bestow upon municipalities an option not a mandate to get the abandoned home off the lot and properly disposed of. Indeed, if a mandate had been intended, the legislature had the ability to use explicit mandatory language ordering the municipality to act. The amendments, therefore, created a new option for municipalities, with the main purpose being the goal of compromise as a means of balancing the needs and concerns of municipalities and manufactured housing park owners. This interpretation is further bolstered by failed House Bill 1212-FN and failed House Bill 232-FN which both, in effect, would have created a mandate on municipalities. The judge found this a dubious aid to interpretation, citing Solid Waste Agency of N. Cook Cnty. V. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 531 U.S (2001) for the proposition that failed legislative proposals are a particularly dangerous ground on which to rest an interpretation of a prior statute. Trial Court Decision On Merits, Notice of Appeal, Add. 8. However, it cannot be ignored that the legislative history of failed HB 1212-FN and HB 232-FN supports the City of Concord s position and consequently further erodes the judge s interpretation. Both bills would have, essentially, mandated a municipality to allow manufactured housing to be relocated without the payment of the taxes. When HB 1212-FN was voted Inexpedient to Legislate, the Committee pointed out that this [bill] is not fair to all other property taxpayers that are required to pay taxes. App Nor would it be fair to construe a statutory amendment, using discretionary language and supported universally as an option and not a mandate, as requiring a municipal to act in a certain way. Therefore, the failure of these subsequent amendments supports the clear legislative intent of HB 137 to give municipalities an option, rather than a mandate, regarding the relocation of abandoned manufactured housing. 10
12 CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, The New Hampshire Municipal Association, amicus curiae, joins in the City of Concord s request for relief. Dated: October 2, 2015 Respectfully Submitted, NEW HAMPSHIRE MUNICIPAL ASSOCIATION By: Stephen C. Buckley, Legal Services Counsel NH BAR ID #225 Margaret M.L. Byrnes, Staff Attorney NH BAR ID # Triangle Park Drive P.O. Box 617 Concord, NH CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that this 2 nd day of October, 2015 I have mailed two copies of this brief to James J. Bianco, Jr., Esquire, Robert M. Shepard, Esquire, Danielle L. Pacik, Esquire. Date: Stephen C. Buckley 11
THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE EVERETT ASHTON, INC. CITY OF CONCORD. Argued: February 10, 2016 Opinion Issued: April 29, 2016
NOTICE: This opinion is subject to motions for rehearing under Rule 22 as well as formal revision before publication in the New Hampshire Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter, Supreme
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE NEW HAMPSHIRE INDEPENDENT PHARMACY ASSOCIATION NEW HAMPSHIRE INSURANCE DEPARTMENT
NOTICE: This opinion is subject to motions for rehearing under Rule 22 as well as formal revision before publication in the New Hampshire Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter, Supreme
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE. ROBERT CARR & a. TOWN OF NEW LONDON. Argued: February 23, 2017 Opinion Issued: May 17, 2017
NOTICE: This opinion is subject to motions for rehearing under Rule 22 as well as formal revision before publication in the New Hampshire Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter, Supreme
More informationFIRST BERKSHIRE BUSINESS TRUST & a. COMMISSIONER, NEW HAMPSHIRE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE ADMINISTRATION & a.
NOTICE: This opinion is subject to motions for rehearing under Rule 22 as well as formal revision before publication in the New Hampshire Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter, Supreme
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE. APPEAL OF KADLE PROPERTIES REVOCABLE REALTY TRUST (New Hampshire Board of Tax and Land Appeals)
NOTICE: This opinion is subject to motions for rehearing under Rule 22 as well as formal revision before publication in the New Hampshire Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter, Supreme
More informationS17G1256. NEW CINGULAR WIRELESS PCS, LLC et al. v. GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE et al.
In the Supreme Court of Georgia Decided: April 16, 2018 S17G1256. NEW CINGULAR WIRELESS PCS, LLC et al. v. GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE et al. MELTON, Presiding Justice. This case revolves around a decision
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE. APPEAL OF TOWN OF BELMONT (New Hampshire Board of Tax and Land Appeals)
NOTICE: This opinion is subject to motions for rehearing under Rule 22 as well as formal revision before publication in the New Hampshire Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter, Supreme
More informationAPPEAL OF CITY OF LEBANON (New Hampshire Board of Tax and Land Appeals) Argued: September 16, 2010 Opinion Issued: February 23, 2011
NOTICE: This opinion is subject to motions for rehearing under Rule 22 as well as formal revision before publication in the New Hampshire Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter, Supreme
More informationIN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA
IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA City of Philadelphia, : Appellant : : No. 216 C.D. 2011 v. : : Argued: October 19, 2011 City of Philadelphia Tax Review : Board : BEFORE: HONORABLE BONNIE BRIGANCE
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE. APPEAL OF WILLIAM STEWART (New Hampshire Department of Employment Security)
NOTICE: This opinion is subject to motions for rehearing under Rule 22 as well as formal revision before publication in the New Hampshire Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter, Supreme
More informationMIDFIRST BANK, a federally chartered savings association, Plaintiff (in CV )/Appellant
NOTICE: NOT FOR PUBLICATION. UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION DOES NOT CREATE LEGAL PRECEDENT AND MAY NOT BE CITED EXCEPT AS AUTHORIZED. IN THE ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAlS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI. No CA-00292
IN THE COURT OF APPEAlS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI No. 2009-CA-00292 3545 MITCHELL ROAD, LLC d~/atupelotraceapartments and PINECREST/TUPELO, L.P. d~/a TUPELO SENIORS APARTMENTS PLAINTIFFS/APPELLANTS V.
More informationIN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA
IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA Allstate Life Insurance Company, : Petitioner : : v. : No. 89 F.R. 1997 : Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, : Argued: December 9, 2009 Respondent : BEFORE: HONORABLE
More informationCOURT OF APPEALS, STATE OF COLORADO 101 West Colfax Ave., Suite 800 Denver, Colorado 80202
COURT OF APPEALS, STATE OF COLORADO 101 West Colfax Ave., Suite 800 Denver, Colorado 80202 Appeal from the District Court, City and County of Denver Hon. William D. Robbins, District Court Judge, Case
More informationROBERT NENNI & a. COMMISSIONER, NEW HAMPSHIRE INSURANCE DEPARTMENT. Submitted: October 18, 2007 Opinion Issued: December 18, 2007
NOTICE: This opinion is subject to motions for rehearing under Rule 22 as well as formal revision before publication in the New Hampshire Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter, Supreme
More informationTHE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SUPREME COURT
THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SUPREME COURT In Case No. 2016-0569, In the Matter of Liquidation of The Home Insurance Company, the court on October 27, 2017, issued the following order: Having considered
More informationTHOMAS P. DORE, ET AL., SUBSTITUTE TRUSTEES. Wright, Arthur, Salmon, James P. (Retired, Specially Assigned),
UNREPORTED IN THE COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND No. 0230 September Term, 2015 MARVIN A. VAN DEN HEUVEL, ET AL. v. THOMAS P. DORE, ET AL., SUBSTITUTE TRUSTEES Wright, Arthur, Salmon, James P. (Retired,
More informationIn re the Marriage of: CYNTHIA JEAN VAN LEEUWEN, Petitioner/Appellant, RICHARD ALLEN VAN LEEUWEN, Respondent/Appellee. No.
NOTICE: NOT FOR PUBLICATION. UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION DOES NOT CREATE LEGAL PRECEDENT AND MAY NOT BE CITED EXCEPT AS AUTHORIZED. IN THE ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION
More informationTHE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SUPREME COURT
THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SUPREME COURT In Case No. 2017-0277, Michael D. Roche & a. v. City of Manchester, the court on August 2, 2018, issued the following order: Having considered the briefs and oral
More informationDecided: May 15, S16G0646. DLT LIST, LLC et al. v. M7VEN SUPPORTIVE HOUSING & DEVELOPMENT GROUP.
In the Supreme Court of Georgia Decided: May 15, 2017 S16G0646. DLT LIST, LLC et al. v. M7VEN SUPPORTIVE HOUSING & DEVELOPMENT GROUP. HUNSTEIN, Justice. In Wester v. United Capital Financial of Atlanta,
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE MARCO PETROLEUM INDUSTRIES, INC. COMMISSIONER, NEW HAMPSHIRE DEPARTMENT OF SAFETY
NOTICE: This opinion is subject to motions for rehearing under Rule 22 as well as formal revision before publication in the New Hampshire Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter, Supreme
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE IN THE MATTER OF JANICE E. MAVES AND DAVID L. MOORE. Argued: April 3, 2014 Opinion Issued: August 13, 2014
NOTICE: This opinion is subject to motions for rehearing under Rule 22 as well as formal revision before publication in the New Hampshire Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter, Supreme
More informationThird District Court of Appeal State of Florida
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Opinion filed October 5, 2016. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. Nos. 3D16-356 & 3D16-753 Lower Tribunal No. 15-25007 Charbonier
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE IN THE MATTER OF MARCIE ALBERT AND GOSSETT W. MCRAE, JR. Argued: January 5, 2007 Opinion Issued: April 18, 2007
NOTICE: This opinion is subject to motions for rehearing under Rule 22 as well as formal revision before publication in the New Hampshire Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter, Supreme
More informationIN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA
IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA Atlantic City Electric Company, : Keystone-Conemaugh Projects, : Baltimore Gas and Electric Company, : Delaware Power and Light Company, : Metropolitan Edison
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA. Case No. SC On Petition for Discretionary Review Of a Decision of The First District Court of Appeal
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA Case No. SC04-957 On Petition for Discretionary Review Of a Decision of The First District Court of Appeal RISCORP INSURANCE COMPANY, RISCORP PROPERTY & CASUALTY INSURANCE
More informationIN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA
IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA Theodore R. Robinson, : Petitioner : : v. : : State Employees' Retirement Board, : No. 1136 C.D. 2014 Respondent : Submitted: October 31, 2014 BEFORE: HONORABLE
More informationIN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA
IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA Salieri Group, Inc., : Appellant : : v. : No. 781 C.D. 2015 : Submitted: November 17, 2015 Beaver County Auxiliary Appeal : Board, County of Beaver, Big : Beaver
More informationCommonwealth of Kentucky Court of Appeals
RENDERED: AUGUST 3, 2012; 10:00 A.M. TO BE PUBLISHED Commonwealth of Kentucky Court of Appeals NO. 2009-CA-001839-MR MEADOWS HEALTH SYSTEMS EAST, INC. AND MEADOWS HEALTH SYSTEMS SOUTH, INC. APPELLANTS
More informationPEGGY WARD CASE NO.: CVA LOWER COURT CASE NO.: 06-CC-3986 Appellant,
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE NINTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR ORANGE COUNTY, FLORIDA PEGGY WARD CASE NO.: CVA1 06-46 LOWER COURT CASE NO.: 06-CC-3986 Appellant, v. RAK CHARLES TOWNE LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
More informationIN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CARBON COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL DIVISION
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CARBON COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL DIVISION CARBON COUNTY TAX CLAIM BUREAU, : Plaintiff : : vs. : No. 11-0850 : RIDGEWOOD COUNTRY ESTATES : HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC.,
More informationNO CA-1441 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI PATRICIA RUSH APPELLANT R R&D & D PROPERTIES, LLC APPELLEE BRIEF OF APPELLEES
E-Filed Document May 31 2018 14:44:32 2017-CA-01441 Pages: 18 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI PATRICIA RUSH APPELLANT v. V. NO. 2017-CA-1441 R R&D & D PROPERTIES, LLC APPELLEE BRIEF OF APPELLEES R.
More informationADMINISTRATIVE DECISION
STATE OF ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS & APPEALS ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION IN THE MATTER OF (ACCT. NO.: ) INDIVIDUAL INCOME TAX ASSESSMENT DOCKET NO.: 17-061 TAX YEAR
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ] ] NO. H023838 Plaintiff and Respondent, ] vs. MICHAEL RAY JOHNSON, ] ] Defendant and Appellant.
More informationTHE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SUPREME COURT
THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SUPREME COURT Docket No. 2009-0307 In the Matter of Donna Malisos and Gregory Malisos Appeal From Order of the Derry Family Division BRIEF OF APPELLANT Gregory Malisos Jeanmarie
More informationPlaintiff-Appellee, : Case No. 10CA3157 JAMES A. PONTIOUS, : DECISION AND JUDGMENT ENTRY
[Cite as Pontious v. Pontoius, 2011-Ohio-40.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT ROSS COUNTY AVA D. PONTIOUS, : Plaintiff-Appellee, : Case No. 10CA3157 vs. : JAMES A. PONTIOUS, :
More informationCase No (Fire Fighter Vincent DiBona's health insurance benefits) OPINION AND AWARD
AMERICAN ARBITRATION ASSOCIATION In the Matter of the Arbitration X between PROFESSIONAL FIREFIGHTERS ASSOCIATION OF NASSAU COUNTY, LOCAL 1588, laff and VILLAGE OF GARDEN CITY Case No. 01-17-0005-1878
More informationIN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE NINETEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR ST LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA. APPELLATE DIVISION
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE NINETEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR ST LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA. APPELLATE DIVISION Circuit Case No. 16-AP-20 Lower Tribunal No. 15-SC-1894 LILIANA HERNANDEZ, Appellant, Not
More informationADMINISTRATIVE DECISION
STATE OF ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS & APPEALS ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION IN THE MATTER OF ACCT. NO.: GROSS RECEIPTS TAX ASSESSMENT DOCKET NO.: 17-180 $ 1 RAY HOWARD,
More informationARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION II
ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION II No. CV-17-174 OPT, LLC V. APPELLANT CITY OF SPRINGDALE, ARKANSAS, AND DOUG SPROUSE, MAYOR APPELLEES Opinion Delivered: October 25, 2017 APPEAL FROM THE WASHINGTON
More informationREAL ESTATE TAX APPEALS: A PRIMER
c REAL ESTATE TAX APPEALS: A PRIMER Moderator/Speaker Robert F. Giancaterino, Esq. Featuring Honorable Vito L. Bianco, JTC (Morristown) Speakers Thomas S. Dolan, Esq. William T. Rogers, III, Esq. S214.16
More informationIN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA
IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA In Re: Consolidated Return of : Luzerne County Tax Claim : Bureau of the Upset Tax Sale of : Properties held on April 26, 2013 : No. 2091 C.D. 2013 : Submitted:
More informationSTATE OF ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE & ADMINISTRATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS & APPEALS ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION
STATE OF ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE & ADMINISTRATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS & APPEALS ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION IN THE MATTER OF COMPENSATING USE & SPECIAL EXCISE TAX (ACCT. NO.: ) ASSESSMENTS AUDIT NO.:
More informationAttorneys for Applicant Insurance Commissioner of the State of California FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
G:\!GRP\!CASES\-0-0\Pleadings\Liquidation Application\Liquidation.Proposed Order.FINAL.doc 0 EDMUND G. BROWN JR. Attorney General of California FELIX LEATHERWOOD W. DEAN FREEMAN Supervising Deputy Attorneys
More information1 of 18 DOCUMENTS. DRUMMER BOY HOMES ASSOCIATION, INC. vs. CAROLYN P. BRITTON & another Randy A. Britton. No. 12-P-1761.
Page 1 1 of 18 DOCUMENTS DRUMMER BOY HOMES ASSOCIATION, INC. vs. CAROLYN P. BRITTON & another. 1 1 Randy A. Britton. No. 12-P-1761. APPEALS COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS 2014 Mass. App. LEXIS 149 March 3, 2014,
More informationCASE NO. 1D Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and J. Clifton Cox, Special Counsel, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA VERIZON BUSINESS PURCHASING, LLC, v. Appellant, NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE DECEMBER 2, 2008 Session
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE DECEMBER 2, 2008 Session UNIVERSITY PARTNERS DEVELOPMENT v. KENT BLISS, Individually and d/b/a K & T ENTERPRISES Direct Appeal from the Circuit Court for
More informationSTATE OF ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE & ADMINISTRATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS & APPEALS ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION TODD EVANS, ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE
STATE OF ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE & ADMINISTRATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS & APPEALS ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION IN THE MATTER OF ACCT. NO.: COMPENSATING (USE) TAX ASSESSMENT AUDIT NO.: DOCKET NO.: 18-237
More informationARIZONA TAX COURT TX /19/2006 HONORABLE MARK W. ARMSTRONG
HONORABLE MARK W. ARMSTRONG CLERK OF THE COURT L. Slaughter Deputy FILED: PRAEDIUM IV CENTURY PLAZA LLC JIM L WRIGHT v. MARICOPA COUNTY KATHLEEN A PATTERSON DERYCK R LAVELLE PAUL J MOONEY JERRY A FRIES
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE REPUBLIC OF PALAU APPELLATE DIVISION
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE REPUBLIC OF PALAU APPELLATE DIVISION Decided: November 23, 2016 BESURE KANAI, Appellant, v. REPUBLIC OF PALAU, Appellee. Cite as: 2016 Palau 25 Civil Appeal No. 15-026 Appeal
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI CONTINENTAL CASUALTY COMPANY. v. No CA ALLSTATE PROPERTY AND CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY
E-Filed Document Sep 11 2017 10:34:38 2016-CA-00359-SCT Pages: 12 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI CONTINENTAL CASUALTY COMPANY APPELLANT v. No. 2016-CA-00359 ALLSTATE PROPERTY AND CASUALTY INSURANCE
More informationTable of Contents FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT:
Important Information About This Summary This document briefly summarizes recent substantive changes to Arizona's tax laws. The bills addressed herein were approved by Arizona's Legislature and signed
More informationIN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE December 15, 2004 Session
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE December 15, 2004 Session STATE OF TENNESSEE v. JESSE JAMES JOHNSON Appeal from the Circuit Court for Franklin County No. 14731 Thomas W. Graham,
More informationSTATE OF ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE & ADMINISTRATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS & APPEALS ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION
STATE OF ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE & ADMINISTRATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS & APPEALS ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION IN THE MATTER OF (LICENSE NO.: ) DOCKET NO.: 17-449 GROSS RECEIPTS TAX REFUND CLAIM DENIAL
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE April 27, 2006 Session
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE April 27, 2006 Session WEYERHAEUSER COMPANY v. LOREN L. CHUMLEY, COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE, STATE OF TENNESSEE Appeal from the Chancery Court for Davidson
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: SC SERVICE INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant, vs. OFFICE OF INSURANCE REGULATION AND
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: SC11-299 SERVICE INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant, vs. OFFICE OF INSURANCE REGULATION AND THE FINANCIAL SERVICES COMMISSION, Appellees. BRIEF ON JURISDICTION OF APPELLEES
More informationCircuit Court for Cecil County Case No. 07-K UNREPORTED
Circuit Court for Cecil County Case No. 07-K-07-000161 UNREPORTED IN THE COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND No. 2115 September Term, 2017 DANIEL IAN FIELDS v. STATE OF MARYLAND Leahy, Shaw Geter, Thieme,
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE MEGAN SMITH CITY OF FRANKLIN. Argued: September 24, 2009 Opinion Issued: January 14, 2010
NOTICE: This opinion is subject to motions for rehearing under Rule 22 as well as formal revision before publication in the New Hampshire Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter, Supreme
More informationENTERED TAWANA C. MARSHALL, CLERK THE DATE OF ENTRY IS ON THE COURT'S DOCKET
Case 14-42974-rfn13 Doc 45 Filed 01/08/15 Entered 01/08/15 15:22:05 Page 1 of 12 U.S. BANKRUPTCY COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS ENTERED TAWANA C. MARSHALL, CLERK THE DATE OF ENTRY IS ON THE COURT'S DOCKET
More information680 REALTY PARTNERS AND CRC REALTY CAPITAL CORP. - DECISION - 04/26/96
680 REALTY PARTNERS AND CRC REALTY CAPITAL CORP. - DECISION - 04/26/96 In the Matter of 680 REALTY PARTNERS AND CRC REALTY CAPITAL CORP. TAT (E) 93-256 (UB) - DECISION TAT (E) 95-33 (UB) NEW YORK CITY
More informationCommonwealth of Kentucky Court of Appeals
RENDERED: APRIL 30, 2010; 10:00 A.M. NOT TO BE PUBLISHED ORDERED PUBLISHED: JUNE 25, 2010; 10:00 A.M. Commonwealth of Kentucky Court of Appeals NO. 2009-CA-000535-MR TRILLIUM INDUSTRIES, INC. APPELLANT
More informationUNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION --------------------------------------------------------------x In re Chapter 9 CITY OF DETROIT, MICHIGAN, Case No. 13-53846
More informationv No Wayne Circuit Court
S T A T E O F M I C H I G A N C O U R T O F A P P E A L S CITY OF DETROIT, Plaintiff-Appellant, UNPUBLISHED March 15, 2018 v No. 337705 Wayne Circuit Court BAYLOR LTD, LC No. 16-010881-CZ Defendant-Appellee.
More informationClark Contracting: Texas Lien Assignees Unperfected?
Clark Contracting: Texas Lien Assignees Unperfected? MICHAEL D. JEWESSON This article explains a recent Texas bankruptcy court decision which jeopardizes the collateral of companies engaged in financing
More informationIN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA
IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA Daniel Iacurci, Nancy Iacurci, : Eleanor Knight, and Eugenia Knight, : individually and on behalf of similarly : situated homeowners in Allegheny : County, Pennsylvania,
More informationIN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA
IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA City of Philadelphia v. City of Philadelphia Tax Review Board to the use of Keystone Health Plan East, Inc. City of Philadelphia v. City of Philadelphia Tax Review
More informationCox v. Commissioner T.C. Memo (T.C. 1993)
CLICK HERE to return to the home page Cox v. Commissioner T.C. Memo 1993-326 (T.C. 1993) MEMORANDUM OPINION BUCKLEY, Special Trial Judge: This matter is assigned pursuant to the provisions of section 7443A(b)(3)
More informationSUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS No. 09-386 DESOTO GATHERING COMPANY, LLC, APPELLANT, VS. JANICE SMALLWOOD, APPELLEE, Opinion Delivered JANUARY 14, 2010 APPEAL FROM THE WHITE COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, NO. CV-2008-165,
More informationCourt of Appeals. Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
In The Court of Appeals ACCEPTED 225EFJ016968176 FIFTH COURT OF APPEALS DALLAS, TEXAS 12 July 10 P3:25 Lisa Matz CLERK Fifth District of Texas at Dallas NO. 05-12-00368-CV W.A. MCKINNEY, Appellant V. CITY
More informationSTATE OF FLORIDA, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA. COMMODITY CONTROL CORPORATION, d/b/a INDUSTRIAL EQUIPMENT & SUPPLIES, Petitioner,
STATE OF FLORIDA, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA COMMODITY CONTROL CORPORATION, d/b/a INDUSTRIAL EQUIPMENT & SUPPLIES, Petitioner, vs. DOR CASE NO. 00-2-FOF DOAH CASE NO. 99-1613 STATE OF FLORIDA
More informationDepartment of Finance Post Office Box 3278 and Administration
STATE OF ARKANSAS OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR 1509 West Seventh Street, Suite 401 Department of Finance Post Office Box 3278 and Administration Little Rock, Arkansas 72203-3278 Phone: (501) 682-2242 Fax: (501)
More informationUNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA IN RE : BANKRUPTCY NO. 05-13361 : CHAPTER 13 JOHN F.K. ARMSTRONG, DEBTOR : : JOHN F.K. ARMSTRONG, Movant : DOCUMENT NO. 48 vs. :
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE. APPEAL OF LAKES REGION WATER COMPANY, INC. (New Hampshire Public Utilities Commission)
NOTICE: This opinion is subject to motions for rehearing under Rule 22 as well as formal revision before publication in the New Hampshire Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter, Supreme
More information) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Petitioner Z Financial, LLC, appeals both the trial court s granting of equitable
FOURTH DIVISION April 30, 2009 No. 1-08-1445 In re THE APPLICATION OF THE COUNTY TREASURER AND Ex Officio COUNTY COLLECTOR OF COOK COUNTY ILLINOIS, FOR JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF SALE AGAINST REAL ESTATE RETURNED
More informationSTATE OF ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE & ADMINISTRATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS & APPEALS ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION DOCKET NO.: WASTE TIRE FEE ( ) 1
STATE OF ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE & ADMINISTRATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS & APPEALS ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION IN THE MATTER OF WASTE TIRE FEE ASSESSMENT (ACCT. NO.: ) DOCKET NO.: 17-254 WASTE TIRE FEE
More informationSTATE OF ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE & ADMINISTRATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS & APPEALS ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION
STATE OF ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE & ADMINISTRATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS & APPEALS ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION IN THE MATTER OF ACCT. NO.: GROSS RECEIPTS ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE TAX ASSESSMENTS AUDIT NO.: DOCKET
More informationIn the Missouri Court of Appeals Eastern District DIVISION FIVE
In the Missouri Court of Appeals Eastern District DIVISION FIVE JOHN EASLEY, ) No. ED94922 Respondent, ) ) ) Appeal from the Circuit Court ) of Cape Girardeau County vs. ) Cause No.: 09CG-SC00129-01 )
More informationState Tax Return. Georgia Supreme Court Denies Refunds of Sales Tax for Repair Parts E. Kendrick Smith Mace Gunter
July 2008 State Tax Return Volume 15 Number 3 Georgia Supreme Court Denies Refunds of Sales Tax for Repair Parts E. Kendrick Smith Mace Gunter Atlanta Atlanta (404) 581-8343 (404) 581-8256 By a slim majority,
More informationCAUSE NOS CR and CR IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS, TEXAS
CAUSE NOS. 05-11-01408-CR and 05-11-01409-CR IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS, TEXAS 5th Court of Appeals FILED: 02/07/2012 14:00 Lisa Matz, Clerk DANIEL LEE MORLEY
More informationNO. COA NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS Filed: 15 July 2014 IN THE MATTER OF: APPEAL OF: Villas at Peacehaven, LLC from the decisions of the
NO. COA13-1224 NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS Filed: 15 July 2014 IN THE MATTER OF: APPEAL OF: Villas at Peacehaven, LLC from the decisions of the Forsyth County Board of Equalization and Review concerning
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI CASE NO CA CITY OF JACKSON, MISSISSIPPI APPELLANT
E-Filed Document Feb 22 2016 15:38:11 2015-CA-00890 Pages: 8 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI CASE NO. 2015-CA-00890 CITY OF JACKSON, MISSISSIPPI APPELLANT VS WILLIE B. JORDAN APPELLEE
More informationCase bjh11 Doc 307 Filed 01/10/19 Entered 01/10/19 16:32:52 Page 1 of 7
Case 18-33967-bjh11 Doc 307 Filed 01/10/19 Entered 01/10/19 16:32:52 Page 1 of 7 Kevin M. Lippman Texas Bar No. 00784479 Deborah M. Perry Texas Bar No. 24002755 MUNSCH HARDT KOPF & HARR, P.C. 500 N. Akard
More informationHOW THE 1998 TAX ACT AFFECTS YOUR DEALINGS WITH THE IRS APPEALS OFFICE. The IRS Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998.
HOW THE 1998 TAX ACT AFFECTS YOUR DEALINGS WITH THE IRS APPEALS OFFICE The IRS Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998 January 22, 1999 Robert M. Kane, Jr. LeSourd & Patten, P.S. 600 University Street, Ste
More informationSTATE OF ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE & ADMINISTRATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS & APPEALS ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION TODD EVANS, ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE
STATE OF ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE & ADMINISTRATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS & APPEALS ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION IN THE MATTER OF LICENSE NO.: DOCKET NO.: 19-209 GROSS RECEIPTS (SALES) TAX REFUND CLAIM DENIAL
More informationADMINISTRATIVE DECISION
STATE OF ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE & ADMINISTRATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS & APPEALS ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION IN THE MATTER OF (ACCT. NO.: ) GROSS RECEIPTS TAX ASSESSMENT LETTER ID: DOCKET NO.: 17-381
More informationDISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT VENICE L. ENDSLEY, Appellant, v. BROWARD COUNTY, FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DEPARTMENT, REVENUE COLLECTIONS DIVISION; LORI PARRISH,
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA PETITIONER S BRIEF ON JURISDICTION
HERBERT KINDL, Petitioner, IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA Case No. v. 5 th DCA CASE NO. 5D10-1722 UNITED SERVICES AUTOMOBILE ASSOCIATION, Respondent. / PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW OF A DECISION
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT, STATE OF FLORIDA
IN THE SUPREME COURT, STATE OF FLORIDA ASSOCIATED UNIFORM RENTAL & LINEN SUPPLY, INC., Petitioner, Case No. SC09-134 3DCA Case No.: 3D05-2130 v. RKR MOTORS, INC., Respondent. On Discretionary Review From
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS PEAKER SERVICES, INC., Petitioner-Appellant, UNPUBLISHED November 26, 2013 v No. 313983 Tax Tribunal DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY, LC No. 00-431800 Respondent-Appellee. Before:
More informationOrder. October 24, 2018
Order Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan October 24, 2018 157007 NORTHPORT CREEK GOLF COURSE LLC, Petitioner-Appellee, v SC: 157007 COA: 337374 MTT: 15-002908-TT TOWNSHIP OF LEELANAU, Respondent-Appellant.
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.:
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: ARNALDO VELEZ, an individual, TAYLOR, BRION, BUKER & GREENE, a general partnership, vs. Petitioners, BIRD LAKES DEVELOPMENT CORP., a Panamanian corporation, Respondent.
More informationbefore September 1 following the date of notice of tax under RSA 72:1-d, to the
STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE CHESHIRE, SS SUPERIOR COURT Case Number: 213-2014-CV-00178 SHIRE FREE CHURCH: MONADNOCK vs CITY OF KEENE MOTION TO DISMISS NOW COMES the City of Keene, by and through its counsel,
More informationPROGRESSIVE NORTHERN INSURANCE COMPANY. ARGONAUT INSURANCE COMPANY & a. Argued: February 16, 2011 Opinion Issued: April 26, 2011
NOTICE: This opinion is subject to motions for rehearing under Rule 22 as well as formal revision before publication in the New Hampshire Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter, Supreme
More informationADMINISTRATIVE DECISION
STATE OF ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE & ADMINISTRATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS & APPEALS ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION IN THE MATTER OF (ACCT. NO.: ) GROSS RECEIPTS TAX ASSESSMENT LETTER ID: DOCKET NO.: 18-024
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS CITIMORTGAGE, INC., and FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTGAGE CORPORATION, Plaintiffs-Appellants, FOR PUBLICATION December 15, 2011 9:00 a.m. v No. 298004 Wayne Circuit Court MORTGAGE
More informationCOMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS APPELLATE TAX BOARD. These are appeals filed under the formal procedure
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS APPELLATE TAX BOARD MALCOLM HECHT, JR.,TRUST A & B v. COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE ALFRED H. MOSES & ROBERT M. HECHT, TRUSTEES Docket Nos. C270679, C270680 Promulgated: February
More informationState of New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division Third Judicial Department
State of New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division Third Judicial Department Decided and Entered: May 3, 2012 511897 In the Matter of MORRIS BUILDERS, LP, et al., Appellants, v MEMORANDUM AND ORDER EMPIRE
More informationPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT. No
PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-1106 EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, v. BALTIMORE COUNTY, and Plaintiff - Appellee, Defendant Appellant, AMERICAN FEDERATION
More informationUNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY APPELLATE PANEL FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
Case: 12-54 Document: 001113832 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/20/2012 Entry ID: 2173182 No. 12-054 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY APPELLATE PANEL FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT In re LOUIS B. BULLARD, Debtor LOUIS B. BULLARD,
More informationSENATE, No. 673 STATE OF NEW JERSEY. 208th LEGISLATURE INTRODUCED FEBRUARY 23, 1998
SENATE, No. STATE OF NEW JERSEY 0th LEGISLATURE INTRODUCED FEBRUARY, Sponsored by: Senator PETER A. INVERSO District (Mercer and Middlesex) SYNOPSIS Adopts series of amendments dealing with Tax Court proceedings.
More information