Legal Opinion

Soyka v. Commissioner of Revenue

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided July 31, 2013No. A12-1706PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

STRAS, Justice.

The question presented in this case is whether the Minnesota Tax Court has subject matter jurisdiction over an appeal when a taxpayer fails to file a notice of appeal within 60 days after notice of the making and filing of an order of the Commissioner of Revenue. The tax court dismissed Soyka’s appeal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. We affirm.

I

On January 19, 2012, the Commissioner of Revenue (“the Commissioner”) ordered relator Sharon A. Soyka to pay $9,126.55 in income taxes, penalties, and interest for the 2007 tax year. Soyka then had 60 days — or until March…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Bond v. Commissioner of RevenueSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2005
  2. Hohmann v. Commissioner of RevenueSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2010
  3. Langer v. Commissioner of RevenueSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2009
  4. Kmart Corp. v. County of ClaySupreme Court of Minnesota · 2006

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Connexus Energy, Relators v. Commissioner of RevenueSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2015
  2. Turner v. Commissioner of RevenueSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2013
  3. Angeline R. Brozovich and Frank V. Brozovich, Relators, vs. Commissioner of Revenue, RespondentSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2025
  4. Soyka v. Commissioner of RevenueSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2014
  5. Soyka v. Commissioner of RevenueSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2014

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

Powered by the Exa API