Legal Opinion · Dissent

Inland Container Corp. v. Mason County

Kentucky Supreme Court

Decided November 18, 1999No. 98-SC-0349-DG, 98-SC-0531-DGPublished

1DissentWintersheimer, Justice

I respectfully dissent because the Court of Appeals correctly reversed the summary judgment entered by the circuit court. Kentucky law precludes the right of Inland to recover utility taxes paid under the circumstances in this case. There is no statutory authority for a refund.

Pursuant to Martin Marietta Aluminum, Inc. v. Hancock County Board of Education, 806 F.2d 678 (6th Cir.1986), Inland must demonstrate that the taxes were invalid and involuntarily paid, or that the taxing authority engaged in misrepresentation. Inland cannot show any of these requirements and consequently is not…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. v. City of LexingtonCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1934
  2. Martin Marietta Aluminum, Inc. v. Hancock County Board of EducationCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1986

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

Powered by the Exa API