Mobay Chemical Corp. v. Director, Division of Taxation

New Jersey Superior Court App Division

Mobay Chemical Corp. v. Director, Division of Taxation

6 N.J. Tax 445

CourtNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division

DecidedOctober 6, 1982

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 6 N.J. Tax 445 (Mobay Chemical Corp. v. Director, Division of Taxation) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Mobay Chemical Corp. v. Director, Division of Taxation, 6 N.J. Tax 445 (N.J. Ct. App. 1982).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Judge Crabtree correctly stated the issue as being one of whether “the facts in this case warrant the conclusion that the subject indebtedness, ultimately and substantively owed to third-party lenders, was owed indirectly to the parent corporation within the intendment of N.J.S.A. 54:10A-4.” 3 N.J.Tax 597, 605 (Tax Ct.1981). He answered that question in the negative and entered judgment in favor of plaintiff. In the course of doing this he distinguished the matter of Fedders Financial Corp. v. Director, 3 N.J.Tax 576 (Tax Ct.1981), this day affirmed by us.

We are satisfied that Judge Crabtree’s findings of fact might reasonably have been reached upon sufficient credible evidence in the whole record whereby we will not disturb them, Mayflower Securities v. Bureau of Securities, 64 N.J. 85, 312 A.2d 497 (1973), and that his conclusions of law comport with that which he described as the legislative intendment. We are also satisfied that the matter is distinguishable from Fedders for the [447]*447reasons set forth by Judge Crabtree. We affirm substantially for the reasons given in his opinion.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

Judge Crabtree correctly stated the issue as being one of whether “the facts in this case warrant the conclusion that the subject indebtedness, ultimately and substantively owed to third-party lenders, was owed indirectly to the parent corporation within the intendment of N.J.S.A. 54:10A-4.” 3 N.J.Tax 597, 605 (Tax Ct.1981). He answered that question in the negative and entered judgment in favor of plaintiff. In the course of doing this he distinguished the matter of Fedders Financial Corp. v. Director, 3 N.J.Tax 576 (Tax Ct.1981), this day affirmed by us.

We are satisfied that Judge Crabtree’s findings of fact might reasonably have been reached upon sufficient credible evidence in the whole record whereby we will not disturb them, Mayflower Securities v. Bureau of Securities, 64 N.J. 85, 312 A.2d 497 (1973), and that his conclusions of law comport with that which he described as the legislative intendment. We are also satisfied that the matter is distinguishable from Fedders for the [447]*447reasons set forth by Judge Crabtree. We affirm substantially for the reasons given in his opinion.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

6 N.J. Tax 445, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mobay-chemical-corp-v-director-division-of-taxation-njsuperctappdiv-1982.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack