Supreme Court of Delaware

Reset A A Font size: Print

Lehman Bros. Bank, FSB v. State Bank Comm'r, 656, 2006

Judgment assessing additional franchise tax and penalties against Lehman Brothers Bank for certain tax years is affirmed in part as to the portion of the judgment upholding the imposition of additional franchise tax where: 1) the bank was domiciled in Delaware for franchise tax purposes, and thus Section 1101(a) was the applicable provision for computing the Delaware bank franchise tax; 2) the bank was not entitled to a particular deduction under applicable law; and 3) the bank was not entitled to any other apportionment because Delaware's taxation scheme authorized the state to tax the bank's entire income, and Delaware's bank franchise tax statute passes muster under both the Commerce and the Due Process Clauses. However, the judgment is reversed and remanded as to a portion upholding the assessment of penalties where the Commissioner failed to consider certain circumstances and thus, abused its discretion by refusing to abate the penalties assessed.

Appellate Information

  • Decided 11/07/2007
  • Published 11/09/2007

Judges

  • JACOBS, Justice:, Before HOLLAND, JACOBS and RIDGELY, Justices.

Court

  • Supreme Court of Delaware

Counsel

  • For Appellant:
  • Stanford L. Stevenson, III and Anne Shea Gaza of Richards, Layton & Finger, Wilmington;  Paul H. Frankel (argued) and Irwin M. Slomka of Morrison & Foerster, LLP, New York City, of counsel, for Appellant.

  • For Appellees:
  • Thomas P. McGonigle of Wolf, Block, Schorr and Solis-Cohen, LLP, Wilmington;  Joseph C. Bright (argued) and Cheryl A. Upham of Wolf, Block, Schorr and Solis-Cohen, LLP, Philadelphia, PA, of counsel, for Appellee.
Copied to clipboard