Legal Opinion

Union Oil Co. of California v. State

Alaska Supreme Court

Decided September 28, 1990No. S-3382PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

BURKE, Justice.

In this appeal we must determine whether the Department of Revenue (DOR) correctly denied Union Oil Company of California’s (hereinafter Union) request for a partial refund for tax years 1973 and 1974. Union calculates its tax liability using for-mulary apportionment instead of separate accounting. The DOR ruled Union’s claim barred by res judicata. The DOR, however, decided Union’s claim on the merits as well, ruling against Union's formulary accounting method. The superior court, sitting as an appellate court, affirmed the DOR’s ruling on the merits, but did not…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Tesoro Alaska Petroleum Co. v. Kenai Pipe Line Co.Alaska Supreme Court · 1987
  2. Kelly v. ZamarelloAlaska Supreme Court · 1971
  3. Earth Resources Co. of Alaska v. State, Department of RevenueAlaska Supreme Court · 1983
  4. National Bank of Alaska v. State, Department of RevenueAlaska Supreme Court · 1982
  5. Matanuska-Susitna Borough v. HammondAlaska Supreme Court · 1986

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Whitacre Partnership v. Biosignia, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 2004
  2. Marathon Oil Co. v. State, Department of Natural ResourcesAlaska Supreme Court · 2011
  3. Rydwell v. Anchorage School DistrictAlaska Supreme Court · 1993
  4. State v. Alaska State Employees Ass'n/AFSCME Local 52Alaska Supreme Court · 1996
  5. State, Department of Revenue v. Atlantic Richfield Co.Alaska Supreme Court · 1993

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

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

Powered by the Exa API