Legal Opinion
Gold Creek Cellular of Montana Ltd. Partnership v. State
Montana Supreme Court
Decided September 24, 2013No. DA 12-0768PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Wheat
¶1 Plaintiffs Gold Creek Cellular and AT&T Mobility (Plaintiffs) brought this action for declaratory judgment alleging that the Department of Revenue’s (Department) regulations Admin. R. M. 42.22.101(12), 42.22.101(10), and 44.22.109, were invalid. Judge James Reynolds granted summary judgment to Plaintiffs. The Department of Revenue now appeals from this order.
STATEMENT OF ISSUES
¶2 Issue One: Did the District Court correctly conclude that the Department’s regulation defining “goodwill” is invalid because it conflicts with §15-6-218(2)(b), MCA?
¶3 Issue Two: Did the District Court correctly…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Federal Land Bank of St. Paul v. Bismarck Lumber Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1941
- BNSF Railway Co. v. FeitMontana Supreme Court · 2012
- In Re the Marriage of HullMontana Supreme Court · 1986
- Bell v. Department of LicensingMontana Supreme Court · 1979
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Bryan v. FawkesSupreme Court of The Virgin Islands · 2014
- Clark Fork Coalition v. Montana WelMontana Supreme Court · 2016
- Espinoza v. Mont. Dep't of RevenueMontana Supreme Court · 2018
- Maffit v. City of HelenaMontana Supreme Court · 2021
- Clark Fork Coalition v. Montana WelMontana Supreme Court · 2016
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.