Legal Opinion

Laurel Pipe Line Co. v. Commonwealth

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided May 26, 1994No. 91 M.D. Appeal Docket 1992PublishedCited by 41 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

NIX, Chief Justice.

This is a direct appeal from the Order of the Commonwealth Court which affirmed the Order of the Board of Finance and Revenue. The Commonwealth Court and the Board of Finance and Revenue refused to characterize as nonbusiness income the gain on the sale of an idle pipeline and related assets by Appellant, Laurel Pipe Line Company (“Laurel”). For the reasons that follow, we reverse.

Laurel and the Board of Finance and Revenue entered into a stipulation of facts which the Commonwealth Court adopted as the factual findings in this case. The stipulation indicates that…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. McVean & Barlow, Inc. v. New Mexico Bureau of RevenueNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1975
  2. Commonwealth v. ACF Industries, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1970
  3. Welded Tube Co. of America v. CommonwealthCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1986
  4. Laurel Pipe Line Co. v. CommonwealthCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1992

3Cited by41 opinions

  1. Texaco-Cities Service Pipeline Co. v. McGawIllinois Supreme Court · 1998
  2. Lenox, Inc. v. TolsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2001
  3. Polaroid Corp. v. OffermanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1998
  4. Hoechst Celanese Corp. v. Franchise Tax BoardCalifornia Supreme Court · 2001
  5. Ex Parte Uniroyal Tire Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 2000

36 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