Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Burger King, Inc. v. State Tax Commission

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided November 8, 1979Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Staley, Jr., J. (dissenting in part and concurring in part).

We would affirm the judgment appealed from in all three proceedings. Special Term held that in Proceeding No. 1 the determination reviewed should be confirmed. We agree.

The main issue in Proceeding No. 1 is whether paper products purchased by it, such as wrappers for sandwiches, cups containing coffee, soda and other drinks, and sleeves for holding french fries and sold to its customers were not sales of tangible personal property for resale as such or as a physical component part of tangible property and, therefore, such sales to…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. American Molasses Co. v. McGoldrickNew York Court of Appeals · 1939
  2. Colgate-Palmolive-Peet Co. v. JosephNew York Court of Appeals · 1955
  3. Dairylea Cooperative Inc. v. State Tax CommissionAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1973
  4. Burger King, Inc. v. State Tax CommissionNew York Supreme Court · 1978

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API