Legal Opinion
Aileen H. Char Life Interest v. Maricopa County
Arizona Supreme Court
Decided July 13, 2004No. CV-03-0348-PRPublishedCited by 18 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
McGREGOR, Vice Chief Justice.
¶ 1 We granted review to clarify the elements a taxpayer must prove to establish discriminatory property tax valuation in violation of Arizona’s Uniformity Clause. Ariz. Const, art. IX, § 1. We exercise jurisdiction pursuant to Article VI, Section 5.3 of the Arizona Constitution, Rule 23 of the Arizona Rules of Civil Appellate Procedure, and Arizona Revised Statutes (AR.S.) § 12-120.24 (2003).
I
¶ 2 A group of property owners (the Taxpayers) brought this action against Maricopa County and the Arizona Department of Revenue (ADOR) to recover taxes allegedly…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- McKesson Corp. v. Division of Alcoholic Beverages and Tobacco, Fla. Dept. of Business RegulationSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
- International Business MacHines Corporation v. The United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1965
- City of Phoenix v. GeylerArizona Supreme Court · 1985
- Bilke v. StateArizona Supreme Court · 2003
- Hutcherson v. City of PhoenixArizona Supreme Court · 1998
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Cornerstone Hospital of Southeast Arizona v. Ernest H. BlackburnCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2012
- AIDA RENTA TRUST v. Maricopa CountyCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2009
- Scottsdale/101 Associates, LLC v. Maricopa CountyCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2015
- Swift Transportation Co. v. Maricopa CountyCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2010
- State Ex Rel. Mendez v. AMERICAN SUPPORTCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2004
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.