Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Commissioner of Revenue v. Richardson, 302 N.W.2d 23.

37 citing documents.

Waters v. Comm'r Revenue 920 N.W.2d 613 Minn. 2018
Waters v. Comm'r Revenue 920 N.W.2d 613 Minn. 2018
Comm'r of Revenue v. Richardson , , 26 (Minn. 1981).
Superior Glass, Inc. v. Johnson 896 N.W.2d 137 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Superior Glass, Inc. v. Johnson 896 N.W.2d 137 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Even if Superior Glass is subject to double taxation in this case due to the application of unemployment-insurance laws in both Minnesota and Wisconsin, double taxation is not per se unconstitutional because the supreme court has held that “neither state nor federal constitutional law forbids double taxation.” Comm’r (stating that even if relator were subject to double taxation, double taxation does not necessarily violate the constitution); see also Estate of Renick v. United States, 687 F.2d 3
A16-1504 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
15 Even if Superior Glass is subject to double taxation in this case due to the application of unemployment-insurance laws in both Minnesota and Wisconsin, double taxation is not per se unconstitutional because the supreme cour t has held that “neith er state nor federal constitutional law forbids double taxation.” Comm’r of Revenue v. Richardson , (stating that even if relator were subject to double taxation, double taxation does not necessarily violate the constitution); see also Estate of Ren
Billion v. Commissioner of Revenue 827 N.W.2d 773 Minn. 2013
Billion v. Commissioner of Revenue 827 N.W.2d 773 Minn. 2013
The Commissioner, on the other hand, argues that we must interpret tax statutes permitting deductions from income strictly against the taxpayer because deductions are “a matter of legislative grace.” Comm’r
Manor v. Gales 649 N.W.2d 892 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
Manor v. Gales 649 N.W.2d 892 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
See Comm’r (“No room for judicial construction exists when the statute speaks for itself.”).
Scott v. Forest Lake Chrysler-Plymouth-Dodge 598 N.W.2d 713 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
Scott v. Forest Lake Chrysler-Plymouth-Dodge 598 N.W.2d 713 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
“ ‘No room for judicial construction exists when the statute speaks for itself.’ ” ().
In Re Linehan 594 N.W.2d 867 Minn. 1999
In Re Linehan 594 N.W.2d 867 Minn. 1999
In Commissioner of Revenue v. Richardson, we said: “No room for judicial construction exists when the statute speaks for itself.”
U.S. Sprint Communications Co. v. Commissioner 578 N.W.2d 752 Minn. 1998
US SPRINT COMM. v. Commissioner of Rev. 578 N.W.2d 752 Minn. 1998
US SPRINT COMM. v. Commissioner of Rev. 578 N.W.2d 752 Minn. 1998
[12] (there is no room for judicial construction when the statute speaks for itself); Sterling Elec.
U.S. Sprint Communications Co. v. Commissioner 578 N.W.2d 752 Minn. 1998
(there is no room for judicial construction when the statute speaks for itself); Sterling Elec.
Green Giant Co. v. Commissioner of Revenue 534 N.W.2d 710 Minn. 1995
Green Giant Co. v. Commissioner of Revenue 534 N.W.2d 710 Minn. 1995
we said, “No room for judicial construction exists when the statute speaks for itself.” Where the statutory language is clear and unambiguous, courts must give effect to its plain meaning.
LaCrescent Township v. City of LaCrescent 515 N.W.2d 608 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
LaCrescent Township v. City of LaCrescent 515 N.W.2d 608 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
§ 645.16 (1992) (when a statute speaks for itself, there is no room for judicial construction); (same).
Swanson v. Independent School District No. 625 484 N.W.2d 432 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Swanson v. Independent School District No. 625 484 N.W.2d 432 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
United Power Ass'n v. Commissioner of Revenue 483 N.W.2d 74 Minn. 1992
United Power Ass'n v. Commissioner of Revenue 483 N.W.2d 74 Minn. 1992
The relators’ argument is based on the rule of statutory construction which indicates that “[n]o room for judicial con *79 struction exists when the statute speaks for itself.” Comm’r
State v. Kiminski 474 N.W.2d 385 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
State v. Kiminski 474 N.W.2d 385 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
“No room for judicial construction exists when the statute speaks for itself.”
London Construction Co. v. Roseville Townhomes, Inc. 473 N.W.2d 917 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
London Construction Co. v. Roseville Townhomes, Inc. 473 N.W.2d 917 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
County of Isanti v. Peterson 469 N.W.2d 467 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
County of Isanti v. Peterson 469 N.W.2d 467 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
“No room for judicial construction exists when the statute speaks for itself.”
In Re the Recommendation for Discharge of Copeland 455 N.W.2d 503 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
In Re the Recommendation for Discharge of Copeland 455 N.W.2d 503 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
Petition of Minnesota Power & Light Co. 435 N.W.2d 550 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Petition of Minnesota Power & Light Co. 435 N.W.2d 550 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Tuma v. Department of Economic Security 374 N.W.2d 446 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Tuma v. Department of Economic Security 374 N.W.2d 446 Minn. Ct. App. 1985

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by