Legal Opinion
Val Kilmer v. Goodwin
New Mexico Court of Appeals
Decided August 31, 2004No. 23,738PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
WECHSLER, Chief Judge.
{1} The issue in this case is whether the New Mexico Taxation and Revenue Department (“Department”) and its hearing officer properly determined that Val Kilmer and Joanne Whatley’s (“Taxpayers”) claim for a tax refund was time barred. We consider the relevant statutes, Taxpayers’ claim that estoppel should be applied against the Department, and Taxpayers’ claims that certain findings of the hearing officer are not supported by substantial evidence. Because it was incumbent upon Taxpayers to either file a protest or an action in district court within the 210-day…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Cummings v. X-Ray Associates of New Mexico, P. C.New Mexico Supreme Court · 1996
- Madrid v. St. Joseph HospitalNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1996
- Gallegos v. Pueblo of TesuqueNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2002
- Morgan Keegan Mortgage Co. v. CandelariaNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1997
- Landavazo v. SanchezNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1990
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- State Ex Rel. Office of the State Engineer v. LewisNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2006
- Kinder Morgan CO2 Co. v. State Taxation & Revenue DepartmentNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2008
- Schneider National Inc. v. State, Taxation & Revenue DepartmentNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2006
- Hess Corp. v. New Mexico Taxation & Revenue DepartmentNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2011
- Waters-Haskins v. New Mexico Human Services DepartmentNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2009
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.