Friessen Const. Co., Inc. v. Erickson
South Dakota Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
DOYLE, Justice.
Respondent taxpayers sued the Minnehaha County Treasurer and the South Dakota Secretary of Revenue for a refund of taxes paid under protest. The taxpayers, who installed concrete pipe for the City of Sioux Falls, were subjected to a usé tax on the pipe pursuant to SDCL 10-46-5 even though they had never held title to it. The taxpayers contend that SDCL 10-46-5, when read with SDCL 10-46-1(2), does not impose a tax on them, or, in the alternative, that SDCL 10-46-5 is void as inconsistent with Art. XI, § 5 of the South Dakota Constitution. The trial court found for the taxpayers…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- United States v. BoydSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
- Argo Oil Corporation v. LathropSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1955
- Brookings County v. SayreSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1928
- State v. City of Sioux FallsSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1932
- Hall Contracting Corp. v. TidwellTennessee Supreme Court · 1974
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- In Re the Appeal of the Sales Tax Refund Applications of Black Hills Power & Light Co.South Dakota Supreme Court · 1980
- Brink Electric Construction Co. v. State, Department of RevenueSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1991
- In Re Royal Plastics, Inc.'s Request for Refund of State & Municipal Sales & Use TaxesSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1991
- Northern Border Pipeline Co. v. South Dakota Department of RevenueSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2015
- Brink Electric Construction Co. v. State, Department of RevenueSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1991
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.