In Re Tax Protests of Midland Industries, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• discussing the holding of Shapiro v. KPERS, [216 Kan. 353,] 532 P.2d 1081 (1975)
• discussing the holding of Shapiro v. KPERS, 216 Kan. 353, 532 P.2d 1081 (1975)
• discussing the holding of Shapiro v. KPERS, 216 Kan. 353, 532 P.2d 1081 (1975)
• “where the state is involved in a proprietary or private function, it will be held to the same responsibility as a private person for injuries resulting from failure to meet its contractual obligations”
• “The choice of the legislature to not provide for the payment of interest on certain refunds while expressly providing for such payment on other refunds indicates an intention to exclude from the omitted refunds the obligation of interest.”
• “Where an amount is due upon contract, either expressed or implied, and there is no uncertainty as to the amount which is due or the date on which it becomes due the creditor is entitled to recover interest from the due date.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).