Court Opinion

ID: 9677311
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 05:49:00.213224+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:16:55.207440
License: Public Domain

RAY, Justice,
dissenting.
The dissenting opinion delivered on March 17, 1982, is withdrawn and the following opinion is substituted.
I join the dissent for the reason that I have found no Texas rule which requires that the Davis airplane had to be physically located at Tim’s Airpark on January 1, 1975. The tax situs for this aircraft is a question of fact. In the present case I am convinced that the objective evidence, as distinguished from any subjective intent, established that the Davis airplane had acquired a tax situs outside the City of Austin. The manifest intent of Davis to locate his aircraft at Tim’s Airpark is exhibited by the objective evidence that the plane left Austin before the end of 1974 and would be hangared at Tim’s Airpark beginning January 1,1975. The airplane had left the City of Austin en route to Tim’s Airpark. State *338v. Crown Central Petroleum Corp., 242 S.W.2d 457, 462 (Tex.Civ.App.—San Antonio, 1951, writ ref’d.). I would hold that the objective evidence supported the findings of the trier of fact.