LegalCaseDocs.com
shopping cart  
  |     
Search
 

 
New Visitors


 VeriSign Secure Site

 Get Adobe Reader

LORENZ v DIVISION OF TAXATION Click to find out why . . .



Keywords & Phrases
CourtCode: AP, CourtName: NEW YORK COURT OF APPEALS, Plaintiff: LORENZ, State: NEW YORK, UniqueCaseRef: NE>AP>087_1004, Tax, Appellant, Memorandum, Pay, Penalties, Taxation, York, Respondent, Costs, Tax Law, Obligation, Subdivision, Judge, Failing, Amount, Unpaid Tax, Contention, Context, Corporate Entity, Language, Manner, Assessed Penalties, Chief Judge Kaye, Judges Simons, Titone, Bellacosa, Smith, Levine, Ciparick Concur , ContentID: 120251117

Case Documents
1 1996-03-26 OPINION
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 125026
1 pages
HTML
Total Documents: 1 document , 1 page.    CAUTION.    PLEASE NOTE THAT THIS IS A ONE PAGE CASE.
Price: $ 19.95


IVESLCD01 KGI0001
 
 

 Forgot your password?


1 . OPINION

EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
APPELLANT
MEMORANDUM
PLAINTIFF
PAY
PENALTIES
TAXATION
YORK
RESPONDENT
COSTS
TAX LAW
OBLIGATION
SUBDIVISION
JUDGE
FAILING
AMOUNT
UNPAID TAX
CONTENTION
CONTEXT
CORPORATE ENTITY
LANGUAGE
MANNER
ASSESSED PENALTIES
CHIEF JUDGE KAYE
JUDGES SIMONS
TITONE
BELLACOSA
SMITH
LEVINE
CIPARICK CONCUR


  FRANKLIN W. LORENZ, APPELLANT, v. DIVISION OF TAXATION OF THE DEPARTMENT OF
  TAXATION AND FINANCE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT.

    N.Y., 87 N.Y.2d 1004, 665 N.E.2d 191, 642 N.Y.S.2d 621 (1996).
    March 26, 1996

   4 No. 52(1996 NY Int. 55)
   Decided March 26, 1996
     _________________________________________________________________

   This memorandum is uncorrected and subject to revision before
   publication in the New York Reports.

    Ralph J. Gregg, for Appellant.
   Andrew D. Bing, for Respondent.

    MEMORANDUM:

    The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.

    Plaintiff conceded that he was "a person * * * required" to collect
   sales tax and was consequently personally liable for any such tax that
   was or should have been collected (Tax Law §§ 1131(1), 1132(a),
   1133(a)). It follows that plaintiff was also subject to Tax Law
   1145, which provides that "(a)ny person failing * * * to pay or pay
   over any tax * * * shall be subject to a penalty * * * (and) interest"
   on the amount of unpaid tax. Plaintiff's contention that in this
   context the "person" referred to in section 1145 is the corporate
   entity on which the tax obligation was initially imposed is belied by
   the language and import of subdivision (a)(7). Under that subdivision,
   penalties and interest are to be "collected and enforced in the same
   manner as the tax." Since the obligation to pay the tax may be
   enforced against plaintiff personally, so too can the assessed
   penalties and interest.

    * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

    Order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum. Chief Judge Kaye and
   Judges Simons, Titone, Bellacosa, Smith, Levine and Ciparick concur.
SNIPPETS:
  • FRANKLIN W. LORENZ, APPELLANT, v.
  • TAXATION AND FINANCE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT.
  • This memorandum is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the New York
  • The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.
  • Plaintiff conceded that he was "a person * * * required" to collect sales tax and was
  • It follows that plaintiff was also subject to Tax Law § 1145, which provides that "ny person
  • Plaintiff's contention that in this context the "person" referred to in section 1145 is the
  • penalties and interest are to be "collected and enforced in the same manner as the tax."
  • Since the obligation to pay the tax may be enforced against plaintiff personally, so too can
  • Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Simons, Titone, Bellacosa, Smith, Levine and Ciparick concur.
  •    |