Quimbee logo
DMCA.com Protection Status

City of Boulder v. Leanin' Tree, Inc.

72 P.3d 361 (2003)

Case BriefRelatedOptions
From our private database of 35,600+ case briefs...

City of Boulder v. Leanin’ Tree, Inc.

Colorado Supreme Court

72 P.3d 361 (2003)

Facts

Leanin’ Tree, Inc. (plaintiff), a company based in Boulder, Colorado, manufactured and sold greeting cards and other gift products. Leanin’ Tree licensed the artwork of independent artists, receiving exclusive rights to reproduce and publish the artwork on its products. To produce its products, Leanin’ Tree would borrow or digitally reproduce the licensed artwork, alter the artwork to fit its needs, and return the original artwork to the artist. Leanin’ Tree would pay the artists royalties in exchange for the right to reproduce their artwork. The city of Boulder (defendant) assessed a tax deficiency against Leanin’ Tree for unpaid use taxes associated with the reproduced artwork. Under Boulder’s tax code, a sales or use tax would be applied to the purchase price of tangible personal property bought or used in the city. Because taxable tangible personal property was often intertwined with a service or intangible property that was not subject to taxation, Boulder’s regulations provided for a true-object test to determine whether a purchase was taxable. According to that test, if the true object sought by a purchaser was not taxable, the entire transaction—including the purchase or use of the tangible-personal-property component—was not subject to taxation. Leanin’ Tree challenged the assessed deficiency in state court. The district court granted summary judgment for Leanin’ Tree, holding that the right Leanin’ Tree acquired through its licensing agreements was an intangible right that was not subject to Boulder’s use tax. The court of appeals affirmed the district court, holding that Leanin’ Tree was exempt from the use tax under a manufacturer’s-processing exemption, which exempted from taxation the sale of tangible personal property that was used as a component part of a manufactured product. Boulder appealed.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Coats, J.)

Concurrence/Dissent (Mullarkey, C.J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 620,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 620,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 35,600 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 620,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 35,600 briefs - keyed to 984 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership