Comer v. State Tax Commission of New Mexico
New Mexico Supreme Court
1DissentSadler, Justice
I disagree with the result reached by the majority. The prevailing opinion written by Mr. Justice ZINN concedes that the language of the two challenged acts, taken literally, indicates an intention to subject plaintiff to the tax imposed. I think it does so with such clearness and certainty as to render improper resort to construction for ascertaining whether the apparent is the real meaning of such language. DeGraftenreid v. Strong, 28 N.M. 91, 206 P. 694.
The tax assailed is levied as a privileges or occupational exaction, graduated in amount by volume of business. Laws 1934 (Sp.Sess.) c. 7,…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Stewart Dry Goods Co. v. LewisSupreme Court of the United States · 1935
- De Graftenreid v. StrongNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1922
- State Ex Rel. Taylor v. MirabalNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1928
- Marrinan Medical Supply, Inc. v. Ft. Dodge Serum Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1931
- State v. ThompsonNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1933
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.