D.D.I., Inc. v. State Tax Commissioner | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 20020241 |
D.D.I., Inc., Danov Corporation,
and Estuary Corporation, Florida corporations, Plaintiffs and Appellees v. State of North Dakota, by and through its Tax Commissioner, Rick Clayburgh, Defendant and Appellant | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Appeal from: |
District Court,
South Central Judicial District,
Burleigh County
Judge Robert O. Wefald | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Nature of Action: | Constitutional Law | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Counsel: |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Term: | 01/2003  Argument: 01/13/2003 01:30pm | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ND cite: | 2003 ND 32 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| NW cite: |
657 N.W.2d 228
Listen to recording of oral argument using RealPlayer Basic,© a free download. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Issues: |
Appellant's Statement of the Issues: I. Whether N.D.C.C. 57-38-01.3(1)(g), the Dividend Received Deduction, is a valid compensatory tax under the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution. II. If N.D.C.C. 57-38-01.3(1)(g) were not a valid compensatory tax, whether the Divided Received Deduction would still be valid as serving the legitimate local purpose of preventing double taxation that cannot be adequately served by reasonable nondiscriminatory alternatives. Appellee's Statement of the Issues: The sole issue in this case is whether the district court (the "District Court") was correct in following the unanimous decision of the United States Supreme Court in Fulton Corp. v. Faulkner, 516 U.S. 325 (1996), which mandated that the District Court declare N.D.C.C. 57-38-01.3(1)(g) ("Dividends Received Deduction Statute" or "DRD Statute") as violative of the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 1 | 09/11/2002 | NOTICE OF APPEAL: 09/09/2002 | ||
| 2 | 10/09/2002 | RECORD ON APPEAL | ||
| 3 | 10/21/2002 | APPELLANT BRIEF | ||
| 4 | 10/21/2002 | Addendum to Appellant's Brief | ||
| 5 | 10/21/2002 | APPELLANT APPENDIX | ||
| 6 | 10/21/2002 | Corrected covers and disk for ATB & corrected covers for ATA | ||
| 7 | 10/24/2002 | DISK (ATB) | ||
| 8 | 11/06/2002 | MOTION OF GEOFFREY SCHULTZ FOR PERMISSION TO APPEAR; AFFIDAVIT OF GEOFFREY SCHULTZ | ||
| 9 | 11/06/2002 | ACTION BY CLERK (Mr,. Schultz's appearance authorized). Granted | ||
| 10 | 11/06/2002 | MOTION OF RICHARD HUSSEINI FOR PERMISSION TO APPEAR; AFFIDAVIT OF RICHARD A. HUSSEINI | ||
| 11 | 11/06/2002 | ACTION BY CLERK (Mr. Husseini's appearance is authorized). Granted | ||
| 12 | 11/06/2002 | MOTION OF JAMES EDWARD MALONEY FOR PERMISSION TO APPEAR; AFFIDAVIT OF JAMES EDWARD MALONEY | ||
| 13 | 11/06/2002 | ACTION BY CLERK (Mr. Maloney's appearance is authorized). Granted | ||
| 14 | 11/06/2002 | MOTION OF MARYANNE LYONS FOR PERMISSION TO APPEAR; AFFIDAVIT OF MARYANNE LYONS | ||
| 15 | 11/06/2002 | ACTION BY CLERK (Ms. Lyons' appearance is authorized). Granted | ||
| 16 | 11/19/2002 | MOTION OF GERARD DESROCHERS FOR PERMISSION TO APPEAR & AFFIDAVIT OF MR DESROCHERS | ||
| 17 | 11/19/2002 | ACTION BY CLERK (Mr. Desrochers appearance is authorized). Granted | ||
| 18 | 11/22/2002 | APPELLEE BRIEF | ||
| 19 | 11/22/2002 | APPELLEE APPENDIX | ||
| 20 | 11/25/2002 | DISK - AEB | ||
| 21 | 12/09/2002 | REPLY BRIEF | ||
| 22 | 12/09/2002 | DISK - RYB | ||
| 23 | 01/13/2003 | APPEARANCES: Donnita A. Wald, Robert W. Wirtz; Richard A Husseini, Geoff Schultz, William P. Pearce | ||
| 24 | 01/13/2003 | ARGUED: Wald; Husseini (Vol. Y; Page 76) | ||
| 25 | 01/13/2003 | ORAL ARGUMENT WEBCAST | ||
| 26 | 03/05/2003 | DISPOSITION: AFFIRMED | ||
| 27 | 03/05/2003 | UNANIMOUS OPINION: Kapsner, Carol Ronning | ||
| 28 | 03/05/2003 | Costs on appeal taxed in favor of appellee | ||
| 29 | 03/07/2003 | Order/Judgment Mailed to Parties | ||
| 30 | 03/28/2003 | MANDATE | ||
| 31 | 04/03/2003 | RECEIPT SIGNED BY DISTRICT COURT CLERK'S OFFICE | ||
| 32 | 08/15/2008 | EXPUNGED - Nonpermanent record items destroyed |