Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State Tax Commission v. Shattuck, 38 P.2d 631.

52 citing documents.

Southwest Airlines Co. v. Arizona Department of Revenue 175 P.3d 700 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2008
Southwest Airlines Co. v. Arizona Department of Revenue 175 P.3d 700 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2008
Instead, we explained, “intangibles may not be taxed because the legislature has failed to provide a means of equalization for or collection of a tax against intangibles.” 118 Ariz. at 173 , 575 P.2d at 803 ( , Maricopa County v. Trustees of Ariz. Lodge No. 2, , and State Tax Comm’n v. Shattuck, , ).
City of Sierra Vista v. Director, Arizona Department of Environmental Quality 988 P.2d 162 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1999
City of Sierra Vista v. Director, Arizona Department of Environmental Quality 988 P.2d 162 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1999
¶ 15 “ ‘An act of the legislature, not amendatory in character, but original in form, and complete in itself, exhibiting on its face what the law is to be, its purpose and scope, is valid, notwithstanding it may, in effect, change or modify some other law upon the same subject.’” State Tax Comm’n v. Shattuck, , quoting Roseberry, 37 Ariz. at 86 , 289 P. at 518 .
Wilderness World, Inc. v. Department of Revenue 895 P.2d 108 Ariz. 1995
Wilderness World, Inc. v. Department of Revenue 895 P.2d 108 Ariz. 1995
Dist., , (citing art. 9, § 3, and stating that legislature could not divert funds if “object for which the money was collected still existed”); Tax Comm’n v. Shattuck, -88 , -35 (1934) (citing Tillotson)-, , 185 P. 133, 136 (1919) (citing art. 9, § 3 as authority for statement that “[p]ublic money can only be raised and used for specific purposes, and those purposes must be pointed out by law”).
America West Airlines, Inc. v. Deparment of Revenue 880 P.2d 1074 Ariz. 1994
America West Airlines, Inc. v. Deparment of Revenue 880 P.2d 1074 Ariz. 1994
Maricopa County v. Superior Court 823 P.2d 696 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1991
Maricopa County v. Superior Court 823 P.2d 696 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1991
It argues that the due process right to challenge a
State ex rel. Arizona Department of Revenue v. Care Construction Corp. 802 P.2d 445 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1990
State ex rel. Arizona Department of Revenue v. Care Construction Corp. 802 P.2d 445 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1990
Kunes v. Samaritan Health Service 590 P.2d 1359 Ariz. 1979
Kunes v. Samaritan Health Service 590 P.2d 1359 Ariz. 1979
this court considered a number of constitutional attacks upon the Intangible Property Tax Act of 1933.
Honeywell Information Systems, Inc. v. Maricopa County 575 P.2d 801 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1977
Honeywell Information Systems, Inc. v. Maricopa County 575 P.2d 801 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1977
Maricopa County v. Trustees of Arizona Lodge No. 2
Folk v. City of Phoenix 551 P.2d 595 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1976
Folk v. City of Phoenix 551 P.2d 595 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1976
Arizona State Tax Commission v. Reiser 512 P.2d 16 Ariz. 1973
Arizona State Tax Commission v. Reiser 512 P.2d 16 Ariz. 1973
State Tax Comm’n v. Shattuck
City of Tempe v. Prudential Insurance Co. of America 510 P.2d 745 Ariz. 1973
City of Tempe v. Prudential Insurance Co. of America 510 P.2d 745 Ariz. 1973
The ‘lieu tax’ is a substituted tax.”
Apache County v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co. 476 P.2d 657 Ariz. 1970
Apache County v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co. 476 P.2d 657 Ariz. 1970
v. Shattuck, , , we quoted with approval from Commonwealth v. Delaware Div. Canal Co., 123 Pa.
State v. Zumwalt 439 P.2d 511 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1968
State v. Zumwalt 439 P.2d 511 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1968
Iman v. Bolin 404 P.2d 705 Ariz. 1965
Iman v. Bolin 404 P.2d 705 Ariz. 1965
We said, , : "It is a cardinal rule of statutory construction that every intendment is in favor of the constitutionality of legislation, , , and unless its invalidity is established beyond a reasonable doubt it will be declared constitutional.
Southern Pacific Company v. Cochise County 377 P.2d 770 Ariz. 1963
Southern Pacific Company v. Cochise County 377 P.2d 770 Ariz. 1963
838 ; Peoples Finance & , ; , .
General Electric Co. v. Telco Supply, Inc. 325 P.2d 394 Ariz. 1958
General Electric Co. v. Telco Supply, Inc. 325 P.2d 394 Ariz. 1958
Williams v. Bankers National Insurance 297 P.2d 344 Ariz. 1956
Williams v. Bankers National Insurance 297 P.2d 344 Ariz. 1956
Porter v. Eyer 294 P.2d 661 Ariz. 1956
Dennis v. Jordan 229 P.2d 692 Ariz. 1951
Roberts v. Spray 223 P.2d 808 Ariz. 1950
Roberts v. Spray 223 P.2d 808 Ariz. 1950
‘To be called by the Board of Supervisors on application of Board of Directors or upon filing of petition signed ‘ * * * by 25% of the electors residing within the District.’ ” It is a cardinal rule of statutory construction that every intendment is in favor of the constitutionality of legislation, , , and unless its invalidity is established beyond a reasonable doubt it will be declared constitutional.
Brophy v. Powell 121 P.2d 647 Ariz. 1942
Brophy v. Powell 121 P.2d 647 Ariz. 1942
Miners & Merchants Bank v. Board of Supervisors 101 P.2d 461 Ariz. 1940
Miners & Merchants Bank v. Board of Supervisors 101 P.2d 461 Ariz. 1940
State of Arizona v. Angle 91 P.2d 705 Ariz. 1939
State of Arizona v. Angle 91 P.2d 705 Ariz. 1939
Perkins v. Hughes 91 P.2d 261 Ariz. 1939
Perkins v. Hughes 91 P.2d 261 Ariz. 1939
Maricopa County v. Trustees Arizona Lodge No. 2 80 P.2d 955 Ariz. 1938
Maricopa County v. Trustees Arizona Lodge No. 2 80 P.2d 955 Ariz. 1938
Powell v. Gleason 74 P.2d 47 Ariz. 1937
Powell v. Gleason 74 P.2d 47 Ariz. 1937