Guardian Energy, LLC, Relator v. County of Waseca

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting that “[a] county’s presumptively 19 valid tax assessment . . . may be successfully challenged with credible evidence that the assessor’s estimated market value is incorrect”
• rejecting contention that tanks were not “permanently affixed” to the land because they could theoretically be removed by detaching them from their foundations or by towing them away
• “Because neither party argues that the tax court applied the incorrect analytical framework in this case, we assume, without deciding, that [Eurofresh] is the appropriate analytical framework.”
• describing the “three forms of depreciation under the cost approach”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).