Legal Opinion

Valentine Co. v. Commonwealth

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania

Decided January 15, 2010PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION BY

President Judge LEADBETTER.

Valentine Company, Inc. (f/k/a Nichols & Associates, Inc.), a licensed surplus lines licensee for Temple University,1 has filed exceptions to this court’s panel opinion and order, which affirmed as modified the Board of Finance and Revenue’s denial of its petition for relief.2 In our initial opinion, we concluded that Temple University was not immune from the 3% surplus lines tax obligation imposed pursuant to Article XVI of The Insurance Company Law of 1921 (commonly referred to as the Surplus Lines Act)3 on premiums that Temple paid to a surplus lines…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Mooney v. Temple University of the Commonwealth System of Higher Education Board of TrusteesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1972
  2. Doughty v. City of PhiladelphiaCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1991
  3. Northeastern Building Registered v. CommonwealthCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1979
  4. Valentine Co. v. CommonwealthCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2009

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. VALENTINE CO. v. Com.Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2010

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

Powered by the Exa API