Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

JOHN D. DUNMIRE AND JAMES A. CASSELL v. APPLIED BUSINESS CONTROLS (12/30/81)

decided: December 30, 1981.

JOHN D. DUNMIRE AND JAMES A. CASSELL, APPELLANTS
v.
APPLIED BUSINESS CONTROLS, INC., APPELLEE



Appeal from the Order of the Court of Common Pleas of Montgomery County in case of Applied Business Controls, Inc. v. John D. Dunmire and James A. Cassel, No. 79-16706.

COUNSEL

Donald J. Martin, for appellants.

Falin F. Walsh, with him, Philip R. Detwiler, for appellee.

President Judge Crumlish and Judges MacPhail and Palladino, sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge MacPhail.

Author: Macphail

[ 63 Pa. Commw. Page 480]

John Dunmire, Esquire, and James Cassel, Esquire (Petitioners) seek to appeal an order of the Court of Common Pleas of Montgomery County, Pennsylvania, which granted Applied Business Controls, Inc. (Respondent) motion for summary judgment against the Petitioners.

The Petitioners are attorneys engaged in the practice of law and are partners in a law firm which has its principal office in the Borough of Norristown, Pennsylvania, with branch offices located in the City of Philadelphia and the Borough of Jenkintown. The Respondent is the local tax collector of earned income taxes for the Borough of Norristown, the Norristown Area School District and the Township of East Norriton.

The Respondent, plaintiff below, commenced two actions in assumpsit for the collection of taxes allegedly

[ 63 Pa. Commw. Page 481]

    due and owing by the Petitioners, defendants below. The Respondent prevailed before the district justice in both actions. The Petitioners appealed to the Court of Common Pleas where their cases were consolidated. Based on the facts to which the parties stipulated, cross motions for summary judgment were filed. The motion was granted as to the Respondent and denied as to the Petitioners.

The relevant facts to which the parties stipulated follow: The Borough of Norristown imposes a one per cent earned income tax on both residents and non-residents working within its territorial limits. The Norristown Area School District imposes a one per cent earned income tax on residents living within that school district and the Township of East Norriton imposes a one per cent earned income tax on all residents of the township.*fn1

It is not disputed that Petitioners Dunmire and Cassel were proper objects of the taxes imposed. Petitioner Dunmire, although not a resident of the Borough of Norristown, or the Norristown Area School District, was working within the Borough of Norristown and therefore subject to being taxed. Petitioner Cassel was both a resident of the Township of East Norriton and the Norristown Area School District and therefore subject to pay earned income taxes to those political subdivisions.

Petitioner Dunmire filed earned income tax returns for the years 1974, 1975, 1976, 1977 and 1978. Petitioner Cassel filed earned income tax returns for the years 1976, 1977 and 1978. Both Petitioners paid the earned income tax as each of them calculated it to be due for each year in question. On every ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.