Legal Opinion
Conoco, Inc. v. Tinklenberg
Colorado Court of Appeals
Decided April 21, 2005No. 03CA1576PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtHawthorne, J.
In this dispute arising out of an assessment of municipal use tax, plaintiff, Conoco,-Inc., appeals the judgment entered against it and in favor of defendants, the City of Commerce City and Roger Tinklenberg, Director of Finance for Commerce City. Commerce City cross-appeals that portion of the trial court’s judgment which required it to pay to Conoco interest earned on funds deposited in escrow. We reverse the judgment as to the interest on the escrowed funds and otherwise affirm.
During all time periods in question, Cono-co owned and operated an oil refinery in Commerce City. As part of its…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Guggenheim v. RasquinSupreme Court of the United States · 1941
- A.B. Hirschfeld Press, Inc. v. City & County of DenverSupreme Court of Colorado · 1991
- Rodriguez v. SchuttSupreme Court of Colorado · 1996
- Whitlow v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1936
- De Laval Steam Turbine Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1931
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Amos v. Aspen Alps 123, LLCColorado Court of Appeals · 2010
- Am. Multi-Cinema, Inc. v. City of AuroraColorado Court of Appeals · 2020
- Ball Aerospace & Technologies Corp. v. City of BoulderColorado Court of Appeals · 2012
- Big Sur Waterbeds v. City of LakewoodColorado Court of Appeals · 2018