Clements v. Utah State Tax Commission
This text of 2001 UT 1 (Clements v. Utah State Tax Commission) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Utah Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
1 1 This case arises from the Tax Commission's (Commission) refusal to grant petitioners an additional hearing regarding the computation method used by the Commission to calculate interest paid on a refund. Petitioners also challenge the computation of interest. Kathleen K. Clements has not appeared either personally or through counsel, and as such, the decision of the Commission as to her is affirmed. William G. Clements has failed to meet his obligation to marshal the evidence supporting the decision of the Commission, and then to demonstrate the fatal flaw in that evidentiary support. The Commission clearly relied upon the description of » interest computation described in the Response to Order filed by the Taxpayer Services Division on March 17, 2000. In so doing, the Commission relied upon substantial and sufficient evidence of the method of calculation and we will not disturb its findings. Furthermore, petitioner has failed to identify any legal basis upon which to criticize the Commission's denial of an additional hearing.
2 Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2001 UT 1, 16 P.3d 1250, 412 Utah Adv. Rep. 6, 2001 Utah LEXIS 1, 2001 WL 10594, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/clements-v-utah-state-tax-commission-utah-2001.