Sundance Helicopters, Inc. v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
BRUGGINK, Judge.
This is an action for refund of Mr Transportation Excise taxes paid by plaintiff. Before the court are the parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment. The broad issue is whether plaintiff operates on “an established line” by flying standardized helicopter sightseeing tours, and if it does, whether plaintiff has a legal obligation to collect and pay the tax. Briefing is complete, and we heard oral argument on February 2, 2012. For the reasons explained below, we deny plaintiffs motion for summary judgment and grant in *2part and deny in part defendant’s cross-motion for…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- United States v. GonzalesSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- BedRoc Limited, LLC v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- Occidental Petroleum Corp. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1984
- Kevin Conway v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2003
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Wolens v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2016
- 15 W. 17th St. LLC v. Comm'rUnited States Tax Court · 2016
- Papillon Airways, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2012