Legal Opinion
Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. v. Kinsman
South Dakota Supreme Court
Decided July 1, 2009No. 25085PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
GILBERTSON, Chief Justice.
[¶ 1.] In early 1981, Metropolitan Life and other foreign insurance companies (collectively MetLife) notified the South Dakota Department of Revenue and Regulation that they believed that certain provisions of the tax code were unconstitutional and that they were paying these taxes in protest. At an administrative hearing on this matter, MetLife’s claims were found to be barred due to its failure to comply with procedural notice requirements in the “protest and suit” tax statutes.
[¶ 2.] In 2004, MetLife sought to revive its claims and appealed from the holding of the…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- McKesson Corp. v. Division of Alcoholic Beverages and Tobacco, Fla. Dept. of Business RegulationSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
- Ward v. Board of Commr's of Love Cty.Supreme Court of the United States · 1920
- Reich v. CollinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Read v. McKennan HospitalSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2000
- Lick v. DahlSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1979
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Pirmantgen v. Roberts County, South DakotaSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2021
- Fedderson v. Columbia Insurance GroupSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2012
- Jensen, Hoffman v. Dep't of CorrectionsSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2025