Legal Opinion · Dissent

McConihe v. Comptroller of the Treasury

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided April 10, 1967No. [No. 180, September Term, 1966.]Published

1DissentBarnes, J.

I dissent because, in my opinion, (1) the language of Sections 167, 168, 169 and 170 of Article 81 of the Maryland Code (1957) when construed together does not indicate a legislative intent that the penalty was applicable under the facts in the present case and, (2) in any event, the language is at least ambiguous and that ambiguity should be resolved in favor of the taxpayer.(1)

Section 167 outlines the procedure when there has been no administration within 90 days of the date of death of a person who died, seized or possessed of property subject to the Maryland inheritance tax. After the 90…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Height v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1961
  2. Comptroller of Treasury v. M. E. Rockhill, Inc.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1954
  3. Bachus v. SwansonNebraska Supreme Court · 1965
  4. Fair Lanes, Inc. v. Comptroller of the TreasuryCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1965
  5. Fowel v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1955

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API