Legal Opinion

Milhous v. Franchise Tax Board

California Court of Appeal

Decided August 12, 2005No. D043058PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

BENKE, J. —

In this tax case plaintiffs and respondents paid taxes assessed by defendant and appellant Franchise Tax Board (the FTB) on income from a covenant not to compete. After paying the assessed taxes, plaintiffs brought this action for a refund. The trial court found that the covenant not to compete had no value in California and produced no income attributable to California.

For the first time on appeal, the FTB argues that because plaintiffs did not pay the interest due on the assessed taxes, as well as the taxes themselves, the trial court had no subject matter jurisdiction…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Complete Auto Transit, Inc. v. BradySupreme Court of the United States · 1977
  2. Abelleira v. District Court of AppealCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
  3. Wisconsin v. J. C. Penney Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1941
  4. People v. GardeleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1996
  5. Mobil Oil Corp. v. Commissioner of Taxes of Vt.Supreme Court of the United States · 1980

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Sahadi v. ScheafferCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2007
  2. In re StierCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2007
  3. 2009 Metropoulos Family Trust v. California Franchise Tax BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2022

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

Powered by the Exa API