Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Stronge & Lightner Co. v. Commissioner of Taxation, 36 N.W.2d 800.

39 citing documents.

Richard Preston Blackwell, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2026
And when a district court tries a case de novo, it tries the case “as if it had not been tried before.” Stronge & 10 Lightner Co. v. Comm’r of Taxation
Mansoor Akhtar, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
When a district court tries a case de novo, it tries the case “as if it had not been tried before.” Stronge & Lightner Co. v. Comm’r of Taxation , 228 Minn. 182, 195
Conga Corporation, d/b/a Conga Latin Bistro v. Commissioner of Revenue, Relator. 868 N.W.2d 41 Minn. 2015
Conga Corporation, d/b/a Conga Latin Bistro v. Commissioner of Revenue, Relator. 868 N.W.2d 41 Minn. 2015
of Dodge, d 410, 413 (Minn. 2005); Stronge & Lightner Co. v. Comm’r of Taxation, 228 Minn. 182, 194
Beuning Family LP v. County of Stearns 817 N.W.2d 122 Minn. 2012
Southern Minnesota Beet Sugar Coop v. County of Renville 737 N.W.2d 545 Minn. 2007
Southern Minnesota Beet Sugar Coop v. County of Renville 737 N.W.2d 545 Minn. 2007
228 Minn. 182, 194 , -07 (1949).
Pacific Mutual Door Co. v. James 465 N.W.2d 696 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
Pacific Mutual Door Co. v. James 465 N.W.2d 696 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
Western Auto Supply Co. v. Comm’r of Taxation, 245 Minn. 346, 368-69 , see also Strange & Lightner Co. v. Comm’r of Taxation, 228 Minn. 182, 200
St. Paul Companies, Inc. v. Hatch 437 N.W.2d 666 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
St. Paul Companies, Inc. v. Hatch 437 N.W.2d 666 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
See Stronge Lightner Co. v. Commissioner of Taxation, 228 Minn. 182, 195
Matter of Branch A-38, Jt. Ditch No. 204 406 N.W.2d 524 Minn. 1987
Matter of Branch A-38, Jt. Ditch No. 204 406 N.W.2d 524 Minn. 1987
A trial de novo simply means a case is to be “tried the same as if it had not been tried before.” Stronge & Lightner Co. v. Commissioner of Taxation, 228 Minn. 182, 195
Tarutis v. Commissioner of Revenue 393 N.W.2d 667 Minn. 1986
Tarutis v. Commissioner of Revenue 393 N.W.2d 667 Minn. 1986
Of course the tax court hears taxpayers’ appeal de novo, deciding the issues anew as if the commissioner had not already made a determination, Stronge & Lightner Co. v. Commissioner of Taxation, 228 Minn. 182, 195 , but included in the issues to be heard by the tax court is the issue of collateral estoppel.
Blue Earth County Welfare Department v. Cabellero 225 N.W.2d 373 Minn. 1974
Blue Earth County Welfare Department v. Cabellero 225 N.W.2d 373 Minn. 1974
of Taxation, 228 Minn. 182 , and Village of Hibbing v. Commr.
In Re Petition of Schwermann v. Reinhart 210 N.W.2d 33 Minn. 1973
In Re Petition of Schwermann v. Reinhart 210 N.W.2d 33 Minn. 1973
of Taxation, 228 Minn. 182 , ] that the effect of a trial de novo on appeal from the order of the commissioner of taxation which was prima facie valid simply placed the burden of introducing evidence to overcome the prima facie status of the order on the taxpayer.
Skelly Oil Co. v. Commissioner of Taxation 131 N.W.2d 632 Minn. 1964
Skelly Oil Co. v. Commissioner of Taxation 131 N.W.2d 632 Minn. 1964
of Taxation, 228 Minn. 182 , 36 N. W. (2d) 800 .
Great Northern Investments, Inc. v. Commissioner of Taxation 127 N.W.2d 444 Minn. 1964
Great Northern Investments, Inc. v. Commissioner of Taxation 127 N.W.2d 444 Minn. 1964
of Taxation, 228 Minn. 182 , 36 N. W. (2d) 800 .
Red Owl Stores, Inc. v. Commissioner of Taxation 117 N.W.2d 401 Minn. 1962
Red Owl Stores, Inc. v. Commissioner of Taxation 117 N.W.2d 401 Minn. 1962
of Taxation, 228 Minn. 182 , 36 N. W. (2d) 800 ; Duluth-Superior Dredging Co. v. Commr.
Sevcik v. Commissioner of Taxation 100 N.W.2d 678 Minn. 1959
Sevcik v. Commissioner of Taxation 100 N.W.2d 678 Minn. 1959
of Taxation, 228 Minn. 182 , 36 N. W. (2d) 800 ; Duluth-Superior Dredging Co. v. Commr.
Anderson v. Commissioner of Taxation 93 N.W.2d 523 Minn. 1958
Anderson v. Commissioner of Taxation 93 N.W.2d 523 Minn. 1958
of Taxation, 228 Minn. 182 , 36 N. W. (2d) 800 , we said that all questions of law and fact are to be viewed by us in the light of tne rule that a decision of the Board of Tax Appeals will not be disturbed if it has any reasonable basis in the law.
Oliver Iron Mining Co. v. Commissioner of Taxation 76 N.W.2d 107 Minn. 1956
Oliver Iron Mining Co. v. Commissioner of Taxation 76 N.W.2d 107 Minn. 1956
of Taxation, 228 Minn. 182 , 36 N. W. (2d) 800 , this court said: “The commissioner of taxation must of course guard against being arbitrary or capricious.
Western Auto Supply Co. v. Commissioner of Taxation 71 N.W.2d 797 Minn. 1955
Western Auto Supply Co. v. Commissioner of Taxation 71 N.W.2d 797 Minn. 1955
of Taxation, 228 Minn. 182 , 36 N. W. (2d) 800 .
Bozied v. Edgerton 58 N.W.2d 313 Minn. 1953
Bozied v. Edgerton 58 N.W.2d 313 Minn. 1953
of Taxation, 228 Minn. 182 , 36 N. W. (2d) 800 ; 1 Dunnell, Dig.
Schultz v. County of Chippewa 57 N.W.2d 158 Minn. 1953
Schultz v. County of Chippewa 57 N.W.2d 158 Minn. 1953
of Taxation, 228 Minn. 182 , 36 N. W. (2d) 800 , we had occasion to consider the effect of a provision of our statutes declaring an order of the commissioner of taxation “prima facie valid” on appeal to the board of tax appeals.
Bolier v. Commissioner of Taxation 45 N.W.2d 802 Minn. 1951
Bolier v. Commissioner of Taxation 45 N.W.2d 802 Minn. 1951
of Taxation, 228 Minn. 182 , 36 N. W. (2d) 800 .