Legal Opinion

Pacific Mutual Life Insurance Company v. Bushnell

Arizona Supreme Court

Decided October 29, 1964No. 7575PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BERNSTEIN, Justice.

Appellant, plaintiff below, is a California insurance company, doing business in Arizona. Appellee is the Director of Insurance of the State of Arizona. In February 1961, appellant filed its Premium Tax Return and a Retaliatory Tax Statement for 1960. On this return appellant contended that its tax should be computed under A.R.S. § 20-230, the Retaliatory Insurance Tax Act; that it should be given Credit for ad valorem taxes paid in Arizona; and that the tax was not due until June IS, rather than on March 31 as' provided iii A.R.S. § 20-224. Appellee agrees that appellant’s…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Helvering v. New York Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1934
  2. Takao Ozawa v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1922
  3. Philadelphia Fire Assn. v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
  4. The People v. . Fire Association of Phil'A.New York Court of Appeals · 1883
  5. Phœnix Insurance v. WelchSupreme Court of Kansas · 1883

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Wicktor v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960
  2. Employers' Fire Insurance v. Taxation Division DirectorNew Jersey Tax Court · 1983
  3. Occidental Life Insurance Co. of California v. CommonwealthCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1972
  4. Principal Life Insurance v. City of Philadelphia Tax Review BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2003

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

Powered by the Exa API