Legal Opinion

Armco Steel Corp. v. Department of Revenue

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided April 11, 1960No. Docket 76, Calendar 48,148PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDethmers, C. J.

Plaintiff sued to recover business activities taxes paid under protest. This is its appeal from summary judgment of no cause for action.

It is plaintiff’s position that the trial court erred in entering judgment for defendants because:

“1. The only activities of plaintiff in Michigan are integral and inseparable incidents of interstate commerce and consequently plaintiff’s receipts are solely derived from or attributable to either intrastate activities wholly without Michigan or to interstate commerce.
“2. The tax under consideration is in operation and effect the equivalent of a tax on gross…

2Cases cited48 opinions

  1. International Shoe Co. v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
  2. Robbins v. Shelby County Taxing DistrictSupreme Court of the United States · 1887
  3. Wisconsin v. J. C. Penney Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1941
  4. James v. Dravo Contracting Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1937
  5. Northwestern States Portland Cement Co. v. MinnesotaSupreme Court of the United States · 1959

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

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Trinova Corp. v. Michigan Department of TreasurySupreme Court of the United States · 1991
  2. International Business MacHines Corp. v. Department of TreasuryMichigan Supreme Court · 2014
  3. Gillette Co. v. Department of TreasuryMichigan Court of Appeals · 1993
  4. Dooley v. City of DetroitMichigan Supreme Court · 1963
  5. W. A. Foote Memorial Hospital, Inc v. City of Jackson Hospital AuthorityMichigan Supreme Court · 1973

11 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