Legal Opinion
Thiokol Chemical Corporation v. Peterson
Utah Supreme Court
Decided June 19, 1964No. 9912PublishedCited by 23 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
CROCKETT, Justice.
Thiokol Chemical Corporation sued to recover certain taxes paid to Box Elder County under protest. The United States intervened as plaintiff because under its cost-plus contract with Thiokol it must reimburse the latter for all costs, including taxes, paid. The Utah Attorney General was served pursuant to Section 78-33-11, U.C.A.19S3, because the validity of the statute is involved.
The plaintiff Thiokol Chemical Corporation (its Wasatch Division) plant in Box Elder County has, since 1957, been engaged in the research and development of the first stage of the Minute Man…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- M'culloch v. State of MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1819
- James v. Dravo Contracting Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1937
- Sunday Lake Iron Co. v. Township of WakefieldSupreme Court of the United States · 1918
- Alabama v. King & BoozerSupreme Court of the United States · 1941
- United States v. City of DetroitSupreme Court of the United States · 1958
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by23 opinions
- Enterprise Management Consultants, Inc. v. State Ex Rel. Oklahoma Tax CommissionSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1988
- ABCO Enterprises v. Utah State Tax CommissionUtah Supreme Court · 2009
- Parson Asphalt Products, Inc. v. Utah State Tax CommissionUtah Supreme Court · 1980
- Alliant Techsystems, Inc. v. Salt Lake County Board of EqualizationUtah Supreme Court · 2012
- Allen v. Tooele CountyUtah Supreme Court · 1968
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.