Representative Experience
    • Reno Flying Service, Inc. v. State of Alabama Department of Revenue (Nov. 19, 2021)
      Sales and use tax case involving the purchase of aircraft by an in-state client. Represented Emergency Medical Response air carrier, headquartered in Birmingham, Alabama, that purchased an air ambulance out of state, hangered it out of state, and never flew it into Alabama. The Alabama Department of Revenue (ADOR) assessed use tax on the acquisition for alleged in-state use of the plane. Bradley attorneys convinced the ADOR Legal Division to dismiss the final assessment, and the Tax Tribunal agreed.

      City of Birmingham vs. Elbow River Marketing, LP(2017)
      Represented an ethanol marketer headquartered in Calgary, Canada, with no office, warehouse, etc. or employees in the City of Birmingham and not doing business in the city, and therefore argued that client was not liable for the assessment of business license tax on its sales to two customers that were either located in or took delivery of products in the city, both via common carrier. Alabama Supreme Court affirmed the trial court ruling.

      Ameris Bank v. Alabama Department of Revenue, AL Tax Trib. Dkt. No. BIT 16-255 (Feb. 9, 2017)
      Tax Tribunal voided the ADOR’s multiple assessments on the grounds that the bank’s formation of a captive REIT subsidiary to hold a majority of mortgages was legitimate state tax planning and that the dividends received deduction applied to dividends from the subsidiary.

      Elbow River Marketing LP v. City of BirminghamAlabama, Jefferson Co. Cir. Ct. Civ. Action No. 01-CV-2014-0624 (2017).
      Circuit Court voided the city’s assessment of business license tax, ruling that the natural gas marketing company, which is headquartered in Calgary, Canada, was selling to in-state customers through interstate commerce and had no taxable nexus with the city.

      Alabama Department of Revenue v. American Equity Investment Life Insurance Company,Case No. 2130933 (Ala. Ct. Civ. App. 2015)
      Appeals courts upheld trial court ruling in favor of taxpayer’s request for apportionment factor relief under the Alabama business privilege tax on both statutory and Due Process Clause grounds.

      Montgomery County Commission et al. v. Federal Housing Finance Agency et al.,2015 WL 223699, __ F.3d __ (11th Cir. 2015)
      11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals upheld district court ruling that our client, the FHFA and its predecessors, FNMA (Fannie Mae) and FHLMC (Freddie Mac), were exempt from Alabama/county recording taxes on the recordation of their mortgages or assignments of mortgages.

      Staged acquisition of NBC Universal by Comcast Corp. from General Electric Company valued at $16.7 billion (2011, 2013)
      Advised General Electric with respect to multistate tax ramifications of the acquisition.

      City of Birmingham v. Veterans Oil Company, Inc., Case No. 1120501 (Ala. S. Ct. 2013)
      Alabama Supreme Court affirmed Circuit Court ruling for our client that the City of Birmingham cannot impose multiple business license taxes on a taxpayer nor arbitrarily reclassify the taxpayer into another business license classification, while granting refunds of City use taxes when the auditor failed to comply with the Alabama Taxpayers’ Bill of Rights requirement that he advise the taxpayer of a potential refund claim when it has erroneously paid tax to another municipality.

      State of Alabama v. Motiva Enterprises LLC,CV 2009-900959 (Jefferson Co. Cir. Ct. 2013)
      Upheld Ala. Dep’t of Revenue Administrative Law Division ruling voiding an assessment of wholesale oil license tax or “WOLF” on a distributor where the Dep't of Revenue attempted to impose new record-keeping requirements retroactively and that would have been practically impossible for the taxpayer to comply with and possibly violated federal antitrust laws.

      HealthSouth Corporation, et al. v. State Dep’t of RevenueCase No. 2100330 (Ala. Ct. Civ. App. 2012) (cert. den. Nov. 21, 2012)
      Affirmed rulings by the ADOR's Administrative Law Division and Circuit Court that granted the taxpayers corporate income tax refunds and related net operating loss adjustments attributable to IRS audit changes, resulting from fraudulently overstated earnings.

      City of Birmingham, et al. v. Orbitz, LLC, et al, Case No. 1100874 (Ala. S. Ct. 2012)
      Unanimous decision affirming the trial court's ruling that on-line travel companies are not subject to Alabama's hotel lodgings tax on their reservation fees.

      Jim Walter Resources, Inc. v. Tuscaloosa County,Case No. 1110067 (Ala. S. Ct. 2012)
      Landmark decision by the Alabama Supreme Court regarding whether a mortgage to secure the guaranty of an affiliate’s debt to a third party lender is a fixed indebtedness subject to Alabama mortgage recording tax. The Court agreed with our client, the taxpayer, ruling that no taxable indebtedness existed until the guaranty was called by the lender.

      Henson v. HealthSouth Corporation, Case No. CV 2003-1604 (Jefferson Co. Cir. Ct. 2009)
      In the case of Henson v. HealthSouth, a claim was made by an individual taxpayer in the county to void a tax exemption awarded to HealthSouth Corporation in connection with the construction of a new "digital hospital." On remand from the Alabama Supreme Court and after substantial discovery, the case was tried in July 2009 and the Court rendered a judgment in favor of HealthSouth upholding the validity of the tax exemption. The plaintiffs did not appeal.

      Tate & Lyle Ingredients Americas, Inc. v. State Dep’t of Revenue, Case No. CV-2008-900755 (Montgomery Co. Cir. Ct. 2009)
      Granting taxpayer’s motion for summary judgment affirming ruling by Administrative Law Division ruling that the taxpayer’s gain from the sale of its affiliate stock was properly classified as non-business income (and non-unitary) income.

      AT&T Corporation v. Surtees, 8 So. 3d 950 (Ala. Ct. Civ. App. 2008)
      Represented AT&T in an appeal of an Alabama business privilege and corporate shares tax assessment in which a part of both statutory schemes was held unconstitutional under the Commerce Clause by the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals and by the circuit court on remand.