Wenner v. Dayton-Hudson Corp.

598 P.2d 1022 (1979)

From our private database of 46,000+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Wenner v. Dayton-Hudson Corp.

Arizona Court of Appeals
598 P.2d 1022 (1979)

Play video

Facts

Dayton-Hudson Corp. (Dayton) (plaintiff) is a department store operator. Various retailers maintain shops and space within the department store. Retailers pay Dayton a percentage of their monthly revenues while Dayton provides various services like electricity and maintenance with the space. The agreement allows Dayton to terminate at any time if a retailer defaults. Pursuant to its tax law, the city of Phoenix, through City Treasurer Wenner (defendant), assessed a tax on the revenues that Dayton earned from its retailers. This tax was to be levied on anyone “[l]easing or renting for a consideration the use or occupancy of real property.” Dayton challenged the tax assessment, arguing that the tax did not apply to it because Dayton was a licensor to its retailers-licensees. The trial court granted Dayton summary judgment. Wenner appealed.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Donofrio, 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 742,000 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 742,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,000 briefs, keyed to 986 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 742,000 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
  • 46,000 briefs - keyed to 986 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