Legal Opinion
Christman v. Franchise Tax Board
California Court of Appeal
Decided December 9, 1976No. Civ. 48370PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
STEPHENS, J.
This is an appeal from a judgment entered upon a written stipulation of facts. Suit was brought by the respondents to recover sums paid under protest to the California Franchise Tax Board after their pursuit of administrative remedies was exhausted. Upon the ruling that respondents were entitled to a tax credit under Revenue and Taxation Code section 18001, appellant brought this appeal.
Facts
In 1965, Chris Motors Corporation (Corporation) was formed under the laws of the State of Georgia, where it located its principal place of business. Theo Christman, the only Californian…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Miller v. McColganCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
- Holly Sugar Corp. v. JohnsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
- MacKay v. City & County of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1900
- Great Western Financial Corp. v. Franchise Tax BoardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1971
- Westinghouse Electric & Manufacturing Co. v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1922
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- General Motors Corp. v. Franchise Tax BoardCalifornia Supreme Court · 2006
- Valentino v. Franchise Tax BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2001
- Taiheiyo Cement U.S.A., Inc. v. Franchise Tax BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2012
- Murphy v. Taxation & Revenue DepartmentNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1979