🧪 TEST MODE ACTIVE Use test card: 4242 4242 4242 4242
VA P.D. 11-55 Corporation Income Tax 2011-02-28

What did the Frederick County final order published as P.D. 11-55 decide about the corporation-income-tax case?

Short answer: The court recorded that the company and the Virginia Department of Taxation had settled, dismissed the action with prejudice, and ordered it removed from the active docket. The published order does not disclose the settlement terms, the disputed tax issue, or a substantive corporation-income-tax holding.

Apply this to your situation

This page answers the general question as of 2011. Ezel answers yours, under current Virginia tax law, with citations.

Currency note: this ruling is from 2011
Subsequent statutory amendments, regulation changes, court decisions, or later rulings may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current tax advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, rate, or position mentioned here.
Disclaimer: This is a Frederick County Circuit Court final order published in the Virginia Department of Taxation's library, not a Tax Commissioner ruling. It documents a settlement and dismissal with prejudice but does not publish the settlement agreement, disputed tax facts, or a substantive tax holding. It should not be read as establishing a general corporation-income-tax rule. This summary is informational only and is not legal or tax advice.
About this page: The plain-English summary, reader guidance, and Q&A below were written by Ezel based on the official state tax ruling. The original ruling (linked on this page as a PDF) is the authoritative source for any reliance.
View original ruling (PDF)

Subject

Court Case No. CL08000265-00

Plain-English summary

The court dismissed the case with prejudice after the parties reported that they had settled. Jno. S. Solenberger & Company, Inc. was the plaintiff, and the Commonwealth of Virginia Department of Taxation was the defendant in Frederick County Circuit Court Case No. CL08000265-00.

The final order states that the settlement terms were contained in a separate written agreement. It does not reproduce that agreement or describe the underlying tax dispute.

The court also ordered the action removed from the active docket and directed the clerk to send certified copies to counsel. Because the published document contains no merits analysis, it supplies no substantive corporation-income-tax holding to apply to another taxpayer.

What this means for you

  • The public document establishes only that the parties settled and the case was dismissed with prejudice.
  • The settlement agreement and its terms are not included in the published order.
  • The order does not explain which tax position prevailed or announce a generally applicable tax rule.
  • This is a circuit-court order, not a ruling issued by the Tax Commissioner.

Common questions

What does “with prejudice” mean in this document?

The order uses that phrase to make the dismissal final in this action; it does not explain the settlement's tax consequences.

Can the tax issue be determined from P.D. 11-55?

No. The published body omits the underlying dispute and settlement terms.

Citations and references

  • Jno. S. Solenberger & Company, Inc. v. Commonwealth of Virginia, Department of Taxation, Case No. CL08000265-00 (Frederick County Circuit Court, final order entered Feb. 28, 2011).

Source

Original ruling text

VIRGINIA:

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR FREDERICK COUNTY

JNO. S. SOLENBERGER &

COMPANY, INC.,

Plaintiff;

v. Case No. CL08000265-00

COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA,

DEPARTMENT OF TAXATION,

Defendant.

FINAL ORDER

THIS MATTER CAME TO BE HEARD upon the representations of the parties that this matter has been settled upon the terms and conditions reflected in a written settlement agreement ("Settlement Agreement") entered into by Plaintiff Jno. S. Solenberger & Company, Inc., and Defendant Commonwealth of Virginia; it is therefore

ADJUDGED, ORDERED, and DECREED that this action is hereby DISMISSED with prejudice; and it is further

ADJUDGED; ORDERED, and DECREED that this action shall be stricken from the active docket; and it is further

ADJUDGED, ORDERED and DECREED that the Clerk shall send a certified copy of this Final Order to counsel of record.

THIS ORDER IS FINAL.

ENTERED this 28 th day of February , 2011.

John R. Prosser, Judge

WE ASK FOR THIS:


Thomas Moore Lawson, Esquire

Virginia Bar No. 28332

Kara L. Godfrey, Esquire

Virginia Bar No. 75992

LAWSON AND SlLEK, P.L.C.

P. O. Box 2740

Winchester, VA 22604

Phone: (540) 665-0050

Fax: (540)722-4051

Counsel for Jno. S. Solenberger & Company, Inc.


Joshua N. Lief, Esquire

Virginia Bar No. 37094

Senior Assistant Attorney General

Office of the Attorney General

900 East Main Street, 3 rd Floor

Richmond, VA 23219

Phone: (804) 786-8816

Fax: (804) 786-1904

Counsel for Defendant

A Copy Attest"

Frederick County Circuit Court

Rebecca P. Hagan, Clerk

by _Pamela Miller__

Deputy Clerk

Get today's answer for your situation

You just read a 2011 ruling on this question. Ezel checks current Virginia tax law and answers your specific situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer cites the authority it relies on.