Legal Opinion
Sherwin-Williams Co. v. Tax Appeals Tribunal of the Department of Taxation & Finance
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided October 28, 2004PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Lahtinen, J.
Petitioner contends that respondents erred in requiring it to file a combined corporate franchise tax report in 1991 with two of its subsidiaries pursuant to Tax Law § 211. Petitioner is an Ohio corporation that does business in New York. Its activities include, among others, the manufacture and sale of various coatings under a variety of brand names, such as “SherwinWilliams,” “Dutch-Boy,” “Martin-Senour,” “Dupli-Color” and “Krylon.” As part of its business, petitioner uses a host of trademarks, trade names and service marks (hereinafter collectively referred…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Frank Lyon Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- American Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. State Tax CommissionNew York Court of Appeals · 1984
- Wurlitzer Co. v. State Tax CommissionNew York Court of Appeals · 1974
- Transervice Lease Corp. v. Tax Appeals TribunalAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1995
- Sherwin-Williams Co. v. Commissioner of RevenueMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2002
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Matter of American Food & Vending Corporation v. New York State Tax Appeals TribunalAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2016
- Rent-A-Center East, Inc. v. Indiana Department of State RevenueIndiana Tax Court · 2015
- West-Herr Ford, Inc. v. Tax Appeals TribunalAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2005
- Gutlove & Shirvant, Inc. v. Tax Appeals TribunalAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2010