Legal Opinion

Halliburton Co. v. Property Appraisal Department

New Mexico Court of Appeals

Decided October 21, 1975No. 1792PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

WOOD, Chief Judge.

The PAD (Property Appraisal Department — See § 72-25-3, N.M.S.A.1953 (Repl. Vol. 10, pt. 2, Supp.1973)) valued, for property tax purposes, certain tangible personal property of the Halliburton Services Division and Welex Division of taxpayer, Halliburton (Halliburton Company). Halliburton protested the notices of value; the director of the PAD denied the protest after a hearing; the taxpayer appeals directly to this Court. Sections 72-25-10, 72-25-11, 72-25-12, N.M.S.A.1953 (Repl. Vol. 10, pt. 2, Supp.1973). Three of the issues are dispositive. They are: (1) PAD’s…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Gruschus Ex Rel. Estate of Adams v. Bureau of RevenueNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1965
  2. United Veterans Organization v. New Mexico Property Appraisal DepartmentNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1972
  3. Michael J. Maloof & Co. v. Bureau of RevenueNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1969
  4. State v. Sunset Ditch Co.New Mexico Supreme Court · 1944
  5. Rust Tractor Co. v. Bureau of RevenueNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1970

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Kaiser Steel Corp. v. Revenue Division, Taxation & Revenue DepartmentNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1981
  2. American Dairy Queen Corp. v. Taxation & Revenue DepartmentNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1979
  3. Rodriguez v. Brand West DairyNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2015
  4. Cohen v. Great Guns, Inc. (In Re Sooner Oil & Gas Corp.)United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Oklahoma · 1982
  5. Anaconda Co. v. Property Tax DepartmentNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1979

3 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