Beeman v. Department of Health & Mental Hygiene Beeman v. Department of Health & Mental Hygiene

Beeman v. Department of Health & Mental Hygiene

1995.MD.40068 ; 105 MD. APP. 147; 658 A.2D 1172

    • USD 0.99
    • USD 0.99

Descripción editorial

On report. This was an appeal from the decision of the assessors of the Town of Houlton declining to abate a portion of taxes assessed to the appellant, Dead River Company, a corporation which was for purposes of taxation as of April 1, 1951 an inhabitant of the City of Bangor. Appellant maintains a place of business in Houlton, where a wholesale and retail oil business is conducted and where it buys some wood. Included in the assessment was an item of ties and lumber valued at $350 and producing a tax of $28.35. Actually this personal property comprised 35 cords of pulpwood and 200 ties. Some time in early April of 1951 and again in the middle of June, a Houlton assessor conferred with a corporate officer acting for appellant, who told the assessor of the existence of the ties and pulpwood, their value and location in Houlton. A rough list of the items in question and their value was prepared and retained by the assessor. At these conferences the position of the appellant was that, although it was the owner of the items, they were in transit and therefore claimed not taxable in Houlton. After receipt of the tax bill, the appellant by its counsel on November 24, 1951 filed application for abatement and by letter indicated that the pulpwood and ties were deemed manufactured lumber in transit. On December 3, 1951 counsel by letter advised the assessors that the ties were the property of another company, and that the pulpwood was destined for a specific mill owned by a third party in another town to be manufactured therein. We find no satisfactory explanation in the evidence as to exactly when the appellant determined that it was not the owner, what basis of reasons, if any, it had for such determination, or what may have occurred, if anything, to cause accident or mistake with regard to title.

GÉNERO
Técnicos y profesionales
PUBLICADO
1995
2 de junio
IDIOMA
EN
Inglés
EXTENSIÓN
24
Páginas
EDITORIAL
LawApp Publishers
VENTAS
Innodata Book Distribution Services Inc
TAMAÑO
77.1
KB

Más libros de Court of Special Appeals of Maryland

Wyatt v. Johnson Wyatt v. Johnson
1995
Caldwell v. Caldwell Caldwell v. Caldwell
1995
Jensen v. Jensen Jensen v. Jensen
1995
Security Management Corp. v. Baltimore County Security Management Corp. v. Baltimore County
1995
Kulbicki v. Maryland Kulbicki v. Maryland
1994
Needle v. White Needle v. White
1990