Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Covert Township Assessor v. State Tax Commission

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided February 7, 1980No. Docket Nos. 60345, 60360. (Calendar Nos. 4, 5)Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Blair Moody, Jr., J.

(concurring in part, dissenting in part). I concur with the analysis and result that the Consumers Power Palisades Plant water pollution control facilities are real property and, therefore, are ineligible for tax exemption under the Water Exemption Act, MCL 323.351 et seq.; MSA 7.793(51) et seq. I dissent from the analysis and result that the facilities of the Palisades Plant constitute air pollution control facilities covered by the Legislature in the Air Pollution Act, MCL 336.11 et seq.; MSA 14.58(1) et seq. Because the Legislature did not clearly intend to include…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. City of Detroit v. Detroit Commercial CollegeMichigan Supreme Court · 1948
  2. East Saginaw Manufacturing Co. v. City of East SaginawMichigan Supreme Court · 1869
  3. Marshall v. Consumers Power Co.Michigan Court of Appeals · 1975
  4. Northern California Ass'n v. Public Utilities CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1964
  5. Meijer, Inc. v. State Tax CommissionMichigan Court of Appeals · 1975

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

Powered by the Exa API