Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

United Air Lines, Inc. v. Department of Treasury

Michigan Court of Appeals

Decided December 10, 1970No. Docket 8620Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partZiem, J.

I agree with my brothers with respect to their holding that reserve for deferred Federal income tax is included in surplus.

However, I must respectfully dissent as to the remaining portion of the opinion.

I am of the opinion that, as it applies to United Air Lines, Inc., for the period involved, the statutory táx allocation formula for aircraft is unreasonable, confiscatory, and unconstitutional and that the relevant portion of the decision of the trial court should be affirmed.

The trial court found that in the application of the statutory formula for computing the tax that only 2.6% of the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Spector Motor Service, Inc. v. O'ConnorSupreme Court of the United States · 1951
  2. Hans Rees' Sons, Inc. v. North Carolina Ex Rel. MaxwellSupreme Court of the United States · 1931
  3. Norfolk & Western Railway Co. v. Missouri State Tax CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
  4. Duluth, South Shore & Atlantic Railroad v. Corp. & Securities CommissionMichigan Supreme Court · 1958
  5. Wisconsin & Michigan Steamship Co. v. Corp. & Securities CommissionMichigan Supreme Court · 1963

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

Powered by the Exa API