Miss. State Tax Comm'n v. Murphy Oil USA, Inc
Docket Number: | 2003-CA-00325-SCT Linked Case(s): 2003-CA-00325-SCT ; 2003-CA-00325-SCT ; 2003-CA-00325-SCT |
|
Supreme Court: |
Opinion Date: 05-26-2005 Opinion Author: Smith, C.J. Holding: Reversed and Rendered |
|
Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Tax assessment - Standard of review - Administrative agency Judge(s) Concurring: Waller and Cobb, P.JJ., Easley, Carlson, Dickinson and Randolph, JJ. Non Participating Judge(s): Diaz, J. Dissenting Author : Graves, J. Procedural History: Admin or Agency Judgment |
|
Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 01-21-2003 Appealed from: Simpson Chancery Court Judge: J. Larry Buffington |
|
Note: | Link inactive |
Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
Appellant: | Mississippi State Tax Commission |
|||
Appellee: | Murphy Oil USA, Inc |
|
Synopsis provided by: If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office. |
Topic: | Tax assessment - Standard of review - Administrative agency |
Summary of the Facts: | In 1999, the Mississippi State Tax Commission examined the Mississippi Combined Income and Franchise tax returns of Murphy Oil U.S.A., Inc. for the following tax years: 1995, 1996, and 1997. As a result of this examination, the Commission assessed additional franchise taxes and interest against Murphy in the amount of $87,952. After two internal agency appeals, Murphy sought judicial review. The chancellor ordered that the additional franchise tax assessment made by the Commission not be allowed. The Commission appeals. |
Summary of Opinion Analysis: | When an administrative agency has performed its function, and has made the determination and entered the order required of it, the parties may then appeal to the judicial tribunal designated to hear the appeal. The appeal is a limited one, however, since the courts cannot enter the field of the administrative agency. The court will entertain the appeal to determine whether or not the order of the administrative agency was supported by substantial evidence, was arbitrary or capricious, was beyond the power of the administrative agency to make, or violated some statutory or constitutional right of the complaining party. In this case, the chancery court clearly did not adhere to the correct standard of review. The court reweighed the evidence. The court never found that the Commission’s assessment was not supported by substantial evidence, was arbitrary or capricious, was beyond their power to make or violated some statutory or constitutional right of the party. In fact, there was sufficient evidence in the record to support the Commission’s decision. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court