Bouchard v. Clark
| Decision Date | 01 November 1990 |
| Docket Number | No. 88-287-M,88-287-M |
| Citation | 581 A.2d 715 |
| Parties | Maurice BOUCHARD, et al. v. R. Gary CLARK, Tax Administrator. P. |
| Court | Rhode Island Supreme Court |
The petitioners, Maurice and Lucille Bouchard, appeal by means of a writ of certiorari from a District Court judgment in favor of the respondent, R. Gary Clark, tax administrator, denying the petitioners' request for a refund of state income taxes paid on federal pension benefits. Additionally the petitioners assert, for the first time on appeal, that the taxation of federal pension benefits by the State of Rhode Island is unconstitutionally discriminatory toward retired federal employees. We affirm the judgment of the District Court denying the petitioners a refund of state taxes paid on the federal pension, and we refuse to consider the constitutional issue raised by the petitioners for the first time on appeal.
The parties herein have entered into an agreed statement of undisputed facts. These agreed facts, as relevant to the case at hand, are as follows.
The petitioners are husband and wife. For all times pertinent to this petition they were residents of the State of Rhode Island. The respondent is tax administrator for the State of Rhode Island. The petitioner Maurice Bouchard was an employee of the Internal Revenue Service until his retirement in 1980. Since then petitioner has received pension benefits from the Civil Service Retirement and Disability Fund.
The petitioners filed joint personal income tax returns in Rhode Island for the years 1981 through 1984 inclusive. The petitioners paid state income tax on money received from Maurice Bouchard's federal pension on each of these tax returns. In 1985 petitioners filed an amended personal income tax return in Rhode Island. This 1985 amended tax return sought a refund of moneys paid in state income taxes on Maurice Bouchard's federal pension benefits for the years 1981 through 1984.
On November 2, 1985, respondent denied petitioners' refund claim, and petitioners subsequently filed a timely request for an administrative hearing. The petitioners' refund claim was denied again on December 1, 1986, pursuant to a final decision and order issued by respondent following the administrative review. In a complaint timely filed on December 26, 1986, in District Court, petitioners sought review of respondent's final decision and order of December 1, 1986.
In their complaint petitioners alleged that money received from Maurice Bouchard's federal pension was exempt from state income taxation. Additionally petitioners contended that since the money Maurice Bouchard received from his federal pension was tax exempt, the couple was entitled to a refund of taxes paid on this income. On June 8, 1988, a de novo trial was held in District Court. Once again petitioners' claim for a refund was denied.
Resolution of petitioners' contention of tax-exempt status of Maurice Bouchard's federal pension from state personal-income taxation was settled during the pendency of this appeal. In Linnane v. Clark, 557 A.2d 477 (R.I.1989), a consolidated case decided by this court on April 19, 1989, we ruled that the Rhode...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Shoucair v. Brown University
...will not consider an issue raised for the first time on appeal that was not properly presented before the trial court." Bouchard v. Clark, 581 A.2d 715, 716 (R.I.1990). Brown cites precedent from the United States Supreme Court5 as well as this Court6 to support its position that the "raise......
-
Neuschatz v. Reitsma, C.A. No. PC-02-1589 (RI 5/24/2004)
...v. Rignanese, 714 A.2d 1190, 1196-97 (R.I. 1998); Casey v. San-Lee Realty, Inc., 623 A.2d 16, 18 (R.I. 1993); and Bouchard v. Clark, 581 A.2d 715, 716-17 (R.I. 1990)). A party who fails to assert an argument at the trial level is deemed to have waived his or her rights on appeal. Fisk v. Ma......
-
Nissensohn v. CharterCare Home Health Servs.
...breach-of-contract claim relates back to the filing of his original complaint below, and it is therefore waived. Bouchard v. Clark, 581 A.2d 715, 716 (R.I. 1990). Accordingly, we discern no error in the trial grant of summary judgment as to plaintiff's breach-of-contract claim arising out o......
-
State v. Dearmas, 2002-189-M.P.
..."will not consider an issue raised for the first time on appeal that was not properly presented before the trial court." Bouchard v. Clark, 581 A.2d 715, 716 (R.I.1990). For these reasons, we do not address the merits of the petitioner's self-incrimination Conclusion In sum, we hold that th......